Various reforms to the electoral law had to be passed in order to achieve the democratic advance conquered at the reform of 1996. This reforms went from the adjustments to eliminate the regional parties and the creation of the organizations in charge of the organization of the elections under the command of the Executive Power; the creation of the party deputy, giving limited access to the opposing parties to the Chamber of deputies; the raise in the amount from 300 to 400  of deputies and establishing the proportional representation system (substituting the party deputies) to the regulation of the public financing for all the political parties registered, as well as the access of the opposing parties to the Federal Electoral Commission and the massive communication media.

In this regard the main objectives that were seek by a new electoral reform carried out in the beginning of 1994, were: impartiality of the electoral organizations; substituting the magistrate counselors to citizen counselors, without the intervention of the Executive Power; depuration of the electoral organizations; renewal of the electoral officers compromised to the regime; allowing groups of “foreign visitors” to observe the elections; give more importance to the citizens in the structure of the IFE at the level of local and district councils, and to grant more authorities to the local and district councils.

The set of amendments published on August 22, 1996 to various articles of the CPEUM and the following reflect at the electoral regulations, at the Federal Electoral Code as well as the electoral laws of the states, were originated from a wide discussion in which since 1994 all the political forces represented at the Chamber of deputies participated.

The contribution of the different positions of the political parties gave place to a profound denial that originated radical changes in the understanding of rules, the arbitrator and the electoral jurisdictional instances.

In this way the Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF) of August 22,1996 published amendments to fragments of the CPEUM (35, 36, 41, 54, 56, 60, 74, 94, 99, 101, 105, 108, 110, 111, 116 and 122); additions to three (98, 105 and 116), and derogated the section VI of article 73, and the second paragraph of the third transitional article of the decree published at the DOF on September 3, 1993, and that referred to a previous amendment that involved articles 41, 54, 56, 60, 63, 74 and 100. By virtue of the new constitutional directions the Federal Code of Electoral Institutions and Procedures (COFIPE) was also reformed by November of 1996.

Previously the Legislative Power, without the intervention of the Executive Power, had named the members of the General Council of the Federal Electoral Institute  (IFE), and the magistrates of the Electoral Court of the Judicial Power of the Federation (TEPJF).

The wideness of the transformation of the legal basis to carry out elections in Mexico implied that, besides form the CPEUM and the COFIPE, other legal regulations involved in the electoral matters were reformed and even the creation of a system of objection means in such subject matter.

Set of laws modified by the reform of 1996

It is important to highlight that the aspect that has been traditionally stressed out from the reform of 1996 is granting complete autonomy to the electoral organization, and that the foresight of the directing principles that they must follow:

1. certainty,

2. lawfulness,

3. independence,

4. impartiality and

5. objectivity.

The need to provide the citizens and the actors of the elections conditions of trust, regarding the impartial activities of the electoral organizations, promoted the perfection of the Electoral process placed at the COFIPE.

The provisions under reform at the different laws essentially establish the rules and conditions for more impartiality for the parties and the political associations, more equity at the elections and a legal framework in which not only the electoral crimes and the corresponding sanctions were foreseen but also the defense mechanisms of the actors before the actions and decisions of the authorities, as well as the possibility to object the electoral laws for not being in accordance to the constitution.

The set of constitutional amendments of 1996 provided elements to the magistrates of the TEPJF in order for their judgments to avoid the experience of uncertainty of previous electoral events.

In this regard it is important to remind a court resolution which is relevant in the electoral issues of the TEPJF of 2001, relying on the change of constitutional provision, in which the “Constitutional and legal principles that must be observed in order for any election to be considered as valid” were defined (TRE-010-2001). Among other things this court resolution points out that:

“...article 116 sets forth, regarding what is relevant for this purposes, that the constitutions and laws of the states guaranty that the elections of the Head of Governments of the states are carried out by a universal, free, secret and direct vote, and that the directing principles of the state electoral authorities are the lawfulness, impartiality, objectivity, certainty and independence. Of the provisions referred the essential elements of a democratic election could be understood, whose compliance must be essential for an election to be considered as the product of the popular exercise called sovereignty…”

Regarding the electoral reform of 1996, notwithstanding that the contribution of the autonomy of the Federal Electoral Institute is acknowledged to this reform, achieved mainly by the exclusion of representatives of the Executive Power in the highest direction board, as well as for the widening of its authorities.

With the purpose of summarizing the main modifications of the electoral law of 1996, following a general characterization of the changes that reached other aspects, based on a synthesis of Becerra, Salazar and Woldenberg.

Regarding the electoral organizations and procedures the most important aspects of the reform were: the Secretary of State is excluded from the General Council of the IFE, but the presence of the Legislative Power is kept by a representative per each one of the parliament sections; the General Council is reorganized internally by means of the appointment of a Chairman of the General Council (which substitutes the General Director), eight Electoral Councilors with voting rights and participation, one Executive Secretariat; for the election of the Electoral Councilors the vote of at least two thirds of the deputies present at the House is required; the executive secretary and the executive directors, on their own, are elected by the vote of at least two third of the members of the General Council; the creation of new commissions of the Council in order for the executive tasks of the IFE is evaluated in a more efficient manner; widening the authorities of the General Council, in order for, determining the maximum limits of electoral campaigns; the Executive Secretariat acquires more responsibilities, among others the one of legally representing the Institute; a General Executive Board is created as the maximum operation organization of the IFE; the structure of the Local and District Councils is modified; a second draw is established for the appointment of officers for the board of directors of the polling stations; the security measures are increased at the electoral instruments and materials, for instance, the definite Voter list includes the picture of the citizen; the pre-electoral polls are regulated; and the observer organizations are forced to present the IFE with a report over their funding.

Among the aspects that were modified by the reform regarding the political parties and associations the following are stressed out: the suppression of the conditioned registry and the establishment of a unique procedure and a series of requirements to evidence with the IFE to one national political party; the determination of a minimum threshold in order for a political party to maintain its registry of at least 2% of the national vote issued; the prohibition of the collective affiliations and establishing the “free and individual” affiliation as the only possibility; the instruments for the revision and surveillance of the public funding of the parties is improved, and they are forced to allow the auditing of their funding; the creation of the political associations, which can participate at the elections if they ally with any political party; the allowance of the partial coalition until a maximum limit at the election of deputies and senators by the principle of plurality system.

As per the conditions of the electoral competition two models of funding for the political parties is established: public and private, the first one of the later must always prevail over the second of the later; the destiny of the public funding is “labeled” to sustain the ordinary activities, campaign expenses and for specific activities; criteria for the distribution of the public funding among all the political forces (30% of the total determined for the campaign expenses is distributed equally and 70% proportionally to the total of votes each party obtained at the past elections) is established; the limit of the private economical contributions that a party can receive annually to no more than 10% of its public funding for ordinary activities; no person can contribute by itself with more than 0.05% of the total amount and the anonymous contributions are suppressed; the General Council of the IFE sets limits to the campaign expenses for each kind of election; granting more spaces to the political parties in massive communication media, which are distributed on 30% an equal basis and 70% on a proportional basis; foreseeing the surveillance of the news at the radio and television as per the time and profile of the news reports transmitted regarding the political parties and their candidates.

Regarding electoral justice the integration of a Electoral Court of the Judicial Power of the Federation is stressed out, as well as the establishment of mechanisms to protect the principle of constitutional basis of the electoral acts and resolutions; the specification of the appeal, revision, inconformity and reconsideration remedies; the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) can solve actions of non constitutional acts that are presented due to the non accordance of the electoral laws to the Constitution; a special action is created to protect the political electoral rights of the Mexican citizens, as well as the “electoral constitutional revision action” to protect that the acts and resolutions of the electoral authorities are adjusted to the constitutional terms; the CPEUM sets forth that the electoral national laws are according to the principles of the COFIPE: equity, lawfulness, transparency, certainty and impartiality.

Regarding the electoral crimes, the clarification of the specific crimes and the precision of the subjects that can commit an electoral crime is stressed out, and the incorporation of this crimes to a chapter of the Penal Code.

Regarding the integration of the Legislative Power the following is stressed out: the protection of the structure of 60% of deputies by majority and 40% of deputies by proportional representation (RP) with a total of 500 seats; the requirement of 2% of the total votes for a political party to participate in the distribution of RP seats, deputies as well as Senators; the establishment of a maximum limit of seats that a political party can obtain (300) and for the over-representation of them (8%); the election of three Senators in each state, two corresponding to the set that obtained more votes (majority) and the other to the first minority; the 32 remaining Senators are appointed by the principle of RP in one sole national constituency.

Finally, regarding the impact to the Federal District, the following is stressed out: the direct election of the Head of Government from the year 1997; the name of “Deputies” of the Legislative Assembly to the afore named “representatives”; the widening of the authorities of the Legislative Assembly of the Federal District; the direct election of the heads of the political-administrative organizations (named “Heads of  Borough”) starting from the year 2000; the suppression of the citizen counselors of the Federal District and the execution by the IFE of the first election of the Head of Government of the entity (1997).

As it can be seen, all the previous characteristics ended in being reflected by the local electoral laws, as the case of the Electoral Code of the Federal District and they are based on the derivation of the COFIPE as well as of the CPEUM.