He Special Electoral Jury (JEE) of Lima Center 1 admitted the appeal filed by the People First party against the resolution that declared the registration of his presidential ticket inadmissible because it was considered out of time. After this, the National Elections Jury, within a period of three days, will evaluate the case, call a public hearing and determine whether to maintain or reverse the decision.
The appeal was presented by the organization’s representative, Marco Antonio Zevallos Bueno, and has the signatures of the party’s presidential candidate, Marisol Pérez Tello, and the representative Gabriela Aída Salvador.
In appeal he also requests that the plenary session of the JNE who determines the course of the lists for the Senate, Deputies and Andean Parliament, since it was his decision that the entire candidacies were referred to the JEE Lima Centro 1.
Grounds for appeal
To support their appeal to the resolution that declared the registration of their list untimely, the representatives maintain that it presents an “insubstantial” and “not very wordy” legal analysis, assigning responsibilities to their political group that, they consider, correspond to the electoral system.
They highlight a document from the JNE General Technology Office, which they indicate presents “several inconsistencies and half-truths.”
“This technical office, which has just recognized the existence of anomalies linked to the digital signature service integrated into its DECLARA+ system, concludes that these “did not represent a material impossibility to complete the registration requests for formulas and lists,” it reads.
To add up to the “nonsense” identified in the JEE Lima Centro report, the party mentions that “the responsibility of a technical body is to affirm or deny the existence of an impact on its system to the detriment (or not) of the administration, and not leave in limbo a situation that is clearly its entire responsibility.” This is because the document indicates that it has not been possible to establish whether the organization was affected or not.
“Using the formula “it has not been able to conclusively determine that said organization has been affected” does not replace the affirmation that there were failures. This single fact vitiates the system and causes us damage, which we will prove with the details of the effects detailed in the notarial act that we accompany as documentary evidence to this document,” they stated.
They maintain that the “deficiencies on the part of the DECLARA+ system and the SIGNNET digital signature service (…) made it impossible for the process of presenting all the lists and presidential plan to be completed, even though they had all the documentation loaded into said system.”
