rafael v Mexico Flashcards
what did he claim
victim of a violation by mexico of his rights under article 19 and 2
what did he request
requested all of the used and unused ballot papers
why was there a recount
it was challenged, the difference between 1st and 2nd was very close. The gap between the 2 shrinked and the number of spoiled ballot papers decreased.
continued to challenge due to quick count votes not being made available amongst other things.
why did the info committee not comply
said it could not comply as the laws did not grant for general access to the ballot papers. Said it should be sufficient to provide the interested party with access to the official records. the nature of the votes in each ballot box and how they add up.
the federal code is they should be destroyed once the election is over.
access to info covers both raw and processed data sp should have satisfied the needs
why not allowed to use amparo
needed to use contesting procedures established in the electoral law. this request was inadmissible
what was the complaint
denied the right to learn what happened in the election and hence his right to question, investigate and consider whether public functions are being perfomed adequately.
As a general rule all info in possesion of any state body is public info
courts view
the federal electoral insitutes denial of his request constituted an excessive restriction of his right of access to info held by the state, without there being reasonable or sufficiently serious grounds for imposing that restriction, given that the purpose of his request did not pose a threat to national security, public order or third parties.
any restrictions imposed must consequently be proprotionate to the interest that justifies them.
what was said about the decision of the supreme court
the decision of the SC constituted a violation of the right to an effective remedfy, established in article 2, paragraphs 3 (a) and (b), reda in conjunction with article 14. it arbitarity denied the author legal protection of his rights and prevented his case from being heard.
the SC violated the principle of legality of departing from it’s own precedents and declaring the subject of the authors request to be an electoral matter.
state parties submissions of the admissibility of the merits.
the authentic spanish version of the convention and it’s contents are presumed to have the same meaning as the other langauges. Not bound to the authentic texts that exist in other languages
it was a unilateral decision for someito to be examined in light of the other treaties
disputes the most favorable provision should be applied.
the commission has already assessed the same facts and found that they satisfied his right to access.
the states view of the info given
the records reflect the will of the voters in as much as they record the number of votes cast for each candidate.
the public has access to the votes even before the difinitve results have been computed.
the election results are published in notices
neither the protocol or the covenant put a time limit on the submissions of communications.
consideration of the merits
by law the ballot papers must be destroyed once the electoral process has been concluded. it is a rational measure that reflects the definitive nature of elections and eliminates the costs of handling and storing ballot papers.
it did not pose a threat to national security, public order or the rights of third parties. could not be restricted under article 19.
the right of access is info held be a state body regardless of form.
