Home > 6 Political parties > COSTA RICA - Electoral Act
 
 
 
Download file    
 
 
ARTICLE 67
 

Political party organs (*)


Without prejudice to the self-regulatory power of political parties to define their own internal organization, these must at least include:


a) A district conference in every administrative district composed of the voters affiliated to the party in each district. (*)


b) A cantonal conference in each canton composed of five delegates from each district elected by the respective district committee.


c) A provincial conference in each province composed of five delegates from each one of the cantonal conferences of the respective province.


d) A national conference as the supreme authority of the party composed of ten delegates from each provincial committee.


e) An executive committee appointed by each conference, composed of at least a chairman, a secretary and a treasurer with their respective substitutes and one person responsible for compliance.


Party structures relating to local committees shall accord with the territorial level at which they are registered. National, provincial or cantonal committees, depending on the level at which the party is registered, shall be the highest-ranking governing bodies in their capacity as the highest authority of each party.


(*) In final judgment N.° 9340-2010 from May 26, 2010 at 14:30 hours, the Supreme Court declared section a) of Article 67 as VOID due to unconstitutionality. Such unconstitutionality was in effect as of September 21, 2011 when this judgment was entirely published in the Judicial Journal n° 181. Background: An unconstitutional action filed against Article 60 of the Electoral Act (Law N.° 1536) was partially declared admissible. The regulation was challenged only because it imposes a party structure on political parties based on the administrative division of the country thus requesting they hold district, cantonal, provincial and national conferences where a specific number of participants is established and excluding the number of voters of each electoral district. The operative paragraph is transcribed as follows: “The action filed against section a) of the first paragraph of Article 60 of the Electoral Act, Law 1536 of December 10, 1952 is declared ADMISSIBLE by unanimous decision. In this way (sic), section a) of Article 67 of the Electoral Act, Law 8765 of August 19, 2009 is void due to related actions. Its text is as follows: “A district conference in every administrative district composed of the voters affiliated to the party in each district.” The action was declared inadmissible in all other respects. Justice Armijo Sancho and Justice Cruz Castro abstained from voting when assessing the unconstitutionality of the phrase included in section a) of the first paragraph of Article 60 of the Electoral Act, Law 1536 of December 10, 1952, which establishes: "a cantonal conference shall be composed of five delegates from each district, by the respective district committee. A provincial conference shall be composed of five delegates from each one of the cantonal conferences of the respective province." In this way, sections b) and c) of Article 67 of the Electoral Act, Law 8765 of August 19, 2009 are declared unconstitutional due to related actions. Their text is as follows: section b) “A cantonal conference in each canton composed of five delegates from each district elected by the respective district committee,” section c) “A provincial conference in each province composed of five delegates from each one of the cantonal conferences of the respective province.” The effects of the declared unconstitutionality are esteemed as of the complete publication of this judgment in accordance with the provisions of Article 91 of the Constitutional Jurisdiction Act. This declaration shall be reviewed at the Official Journal and published entirely at the Judicial Journal. This declaration shall be notified to the President of the Legislative Assembly and to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. To be notified.” 


Complete judgment N.° 9340-2010 was published at the Judicial Journal N.° 181 of September 21, 2011.