The legislator has made clear her interest in knowing if the designation of Morena’s candidate for the Oaxacan governorship was defined by parity. “It’s the only thing I ask to know,” she said. The candidacy is still up in the air.
“The grievances are partially founded, because although Morena formally complied with the principle of parity, it is also true that it lacks internal regulatory mechanisms to achieve substantive parity with a cross-cutting approach for candidates for governor or governor,” refers the text of 37 pages.
He refers that in Morena there are no regulatory mechanisms that foresee what should be done in this type of case and thereby fulfill its duty to guarantee substantive parity through criteria of competitiveness and transversality, especially for candidates for governor.
The foregoing, adds the text, “constitutes sufficient reason for this Superior Chamber to order concrete actions to guarantee that formal and material parity is guaranteed in future processes”, because political parties should not be constrained to comply with formal or material parity. quantitative, but must seek the best way to achieve substantive parity.
Given the facts, Morena was ordered to define clear rules no later than the beginning of the next electoral process for governorships, specifying how it will apply transversality or competitiveness in order to guarantee substantive parity.
