The Prosecutor’s Office of the Supreme Court supports the review requested by the PSOE of the more than 30,000 votes invalidated in the Autonomous Community of Madrid after the July 23 elections. The Ministry of State considers the Socialists’ motion to be “reasonable” given the close election result due to the “small margin” of 1,323 votes that was used to allocate the last seat in Madrid. Prosecutors believe that the invalid vote check in this case is “irreplaceable” to “remove any reasonable doubt as to the true and accurate will of the electoral body.”
The prosecutor’s position gives fresh impetus to the PSOE’s request after the Central Electoral Committee (JEC) refused to review the invalid votes in Madrid, which could once again change the fate of the last seat in that constituency. After the recount of the votes according to the electoral census of absent residents (CERA), Spaniards living abroad, the PP of the PSOE won the last seat for the constituency of Madrid, leading to the PP adding its proxy number 137 and the PSOE leave fall one and stay at 121. The seat rotated parties with a difference of only 1,323 votes in Madrid, where the PP received 41.09% of the vote, 1,463,112 votes and 16 seats, while the PSOE 28.21%, Reached 1,004,567 votes and 10 deputies.
The contested seat is crucial for the Socialists as it would facilitate negotiations to re-form the progressive coalition government. After losing the MP, the PSOE is left with a parliamentary group of 121 MPs. And in the case of Sumar, ERC, EH Bildu, PNV and BNG supporting, a total of 171 seats would come up for the inauguration of Pedro Sánchez. In this scenario, the Socialists need at least one vote for the junts, which has greater political implications and gives Carles Puigdemont’s formation more opportunities to put pressure on the negotiations. If the Socialists won that seat, the mere abstention of the party of the Catalan ex-president, who fled Spanish justice, would be enough for them to win the inauguration.
The importance of this last seat in Congress prompted the Socialists, once the general scrutiny was over, to turn to the Zone Electoral Committee and then to headquarters to verify the 30,302 votes invalidated at the 7,118 community tables in Madrid. The electoral authorities rejected the PSOE’s claim and this party decided to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has asked the Prosecutor’s Office for an opinion, and in this proceeding the Ministry has expressed its favorable opinion and reviewed all invalid votes.
In the brief submitted to the Supreme Court, the Controversial Administration Prosecutor’s Office warns that the review of invalid votes in this constituency “is likely to have repercussions on the outcome of the election and therefore on the exercise of the fundamental right under Article 23 of the Spanish Constitution, which enshrines the right of citizens to access public offices under equal conditions. In their letter, to which El PAÍS had access, prosecutors warn of the “potential determinant influence” of invalid ballots on the election result, which was mainly due to the high number of ballots invalidated in Madrid (30,302). compared to the “small number” of votes required to win another seat (about 1,340).
The prosecutor who signed the letter, Ricardo González, points out that the constitutional doctrine stipulates that the electoral body must “validate the votes wrongly invalidated by the electoral tables compiled by lay people” and that “this is not the case in the LOREG the case is.” [la ley del régimen electoral general] There is no rule specifically prohibiting the right to review invalid votes. The text cites a 2015 Constitutional Court ruling, which concludes: “If the law orders the preservation of those votes (all votes that have been denied validity, and not just those that have been the subject of a lawsuit: see Article 97.3 LOREG), if this is the case.” must be mandatory to allow verification and audit of these reconciliations at a later date; even if they hadn’t been challenged in front of the tables. Moreover, it is not only an irreproachable but also a necessary goal for what has already been said, in a democratic state that recognizes no other source of power than that which arises from the will of its citizens (Articles 1.2, 66.1, 68.1, 69.2, 99 and 117.1 AD), so far as it aims to know the will of the electorate as perfectly as possible.”
What affects most is what happens closer. Subscribe so you don’t miss anything.
subscribe to
The prosecution points out that “it is perfectly understandable” that the refusal to check the null vote “since it jeopardizes the knowledge and acceptance of the true will – in its precise and delimited dimension – of the electoral body and thereby also jeopardizes the … .” Regularity of the election procedure”. For this reason, she believes that the contentious process put forward by the PSOE should be addressed by a 1999 constitutional provision that states: “Only those grounds of challenge relating to the regularity of the ‘electoral process’ and delegated powers. “to the electoral committees to control them may have a place in the contentious electoral process.”
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits