English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the current scenario of controversy about the election annulment due to the breach of constitutional principles, this article underlines the importance of the principle of electoral legality. The author asks himself about the kind of irregularities that should determine the cancellatin of the election and which type of measures should be taken in that case. In spite of the clear differences between Mexican and Spanish models —because of the role of the latter “Junta Electoral Central” during electoral campaigns—, the legal phenomenon is basically the same, and hence, a comparison is possible. The paper provides systematic information of the long Spanish experience on judicial review of electoral irregularities and conflicts. Here, we can find how constitutional jurisprudence has used two criteria at the same time: First, a quantitative approach (which is incumbent when the irregularity has actually changed the electoral outcome; which is a more common interpretation); and second, a new criteria related to the type of the irregularity. Finally, some arguments about the need on constitutionally congruent interpretation of electoral laws is presented.

Irregularidades invalidantes y nulidad de la elección según la experiencia de la jurisdicción constitucional española