Analysis of Article 91 paragraph "d" of the Paraguayan Electoral Code
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70833/rseisa17item336Keywords:
Freedom, Suffrage, Equality, Elections, National ConstitutionAbstract
The Electoral Code of the Republic of Paraguay provides legal impediments for those deprived of liberty without conviction to have access to the suffrage, with the referred prohibition, fundamental principles of the National Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) approved and ratified by Paraguay are violated. The objective of the research was to analyze article 91 inc. "d" of the electoral code contrasting it with the universal principle of the right to vote established in the Paraguayan Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by the country. The methodology used for this research was the documentary review; the approach was qualitative, the data collection tool was the interview applied in August 2022 to the political actors, electoral judge, representative of the Public Ministry, departmental proxies of the political parties of the National Republican Association and the Authentic Radical Liberal Party in the city of Salto del Guairá. The result was the incompatibility of Art. 91 inc. "d" of the Electoral Code of Paraguay with the universal principle of the right to vote established in the Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay. Therefore, this research concludes this investigation sustaining the existing incompatibility between Art. 91 inc. "d" of the Electoral Code with the universal principle of the right to Suffrage established in the National Constitution of Paraguay and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Downloads
References
Baños, J. (2006). Teorías de la democracia: Debates actuales. Andamios. Revista de Investigación Social.
Barros Daher, N., & Matthei Schacht, E. (2017). El derecho de sufragio de los privados de libertad en establecimientos penitenciarios: Un análisis desde la perspectiva de las restricciones constitucionales y fácticas para su ejercicio.
Coello Garcés, C. (2017). Suspensión del derecho al sufragio de los presos.
Filártiga Callizo, C. J. (2018). Sistema electoral paraguayo: consideraciones para una reforma constitucional.
Gernhoffer Núñez, A. (2015). Síntesis de derecho político (2a.). Ediciones y Arte S.A.
Gómez Hernández, G., & Ruiz López, M. (2018). Derecho al voto activo de las personas en prisión preventiva.
Habermas, J. (2005). Tres modelos de democracia. Sobre el concepto de una política deliberativa. Obtenido de file:///H:/Descargas/polis-7473.pdf
Hermosa B. (2011) Derecho Romano. La ley Paraguaya. Octava edición. ISBN: 9789995364052
Hernández, E., (2014). Metodología de la Investigación. Obtenido de https://www.uca.ac.cr/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Investigacion.pdf
Humphrey, T., (1997). Ciudadanía y Clase social. Obtenido de file:///H:/Descargas/Dialnet-CiudadaniaYClaseSocial-760109.pdf
Institucional. (2016). Mapa de debilidades del sistema electoral Paraguay 2016.
Institucional. (2020). Presos sin condena deberían votar.
Lizcano Fernández, F. (2012). La Política: Deliberación, técnica y movimiento. Revista Latinoamericana.
Marshall, P., &Rochow, D. (2018). El sufragio de las personas privadas de libertad. Un análisis a partir de la sentencia.
Pangrazio Ciancio, M. Á. (2007). Los sistemas electorales. Intercontinental.
Ramírez Candia, M. D. (2009). Derecho constitucional paraguayo (3a.). Litocolor S.R.L.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Albina Cañete González, Lucia Cañete González, Francisco Julián Delgado Martínez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercially.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable way, but not in any way that suggests that you or your use is endorsed by the Licensor.