Sistema Electoral del Distrito Federal ::

< go back
4. Institutions and political actors
The contemporary political theory has analyzed from different perspectives the roll that the institutions play in the construction or consolidation of democracies. To explain the case of the electoral institutions in the capital of the country it is necessary to have a conceptual referral of democracy. To explain what democracy means, it is necessary to appeal to, at least, three of the philosophers that have contributed the most to the analysis of this concept: Norberto Bobbio, Giovanni Sartori and Robert Dahl. *Norberto Bobbio* has determined what he calls a minimum definition of democracy. Firstly, he considers that when talking about democracy there is a reference to a counter position to all forms of autocratic government. Additionally a democracy is characterized by having a “series of rules (basic or fundamental) that set forth those who are authorized for taking collective decisions and under what procedures” Also, he points out that there are three conditions in order to be able to establish this minimum definition of democracy: a) The right of direct or indirect participation in the making of collective decisions by the highest number of citizens that is possible, through the exercise of vote; b) the existence of procedural rules, as the rule of the majority that deems the decisions taken by the majority as mandatory for the group; and c) that those who are called to decide or choose those who decide have real alternatives and can choose between one or the other, in order for which they should have their rights of opinion, reunion or associations secured. It is important to say that according to Bobbio, although these rights are part of constitutional provisions, these provisions “are not game rules but instead they are the preliminary rules that allow the development of the game”. To these three requirements the following suppositions can be added, that, according to Bobbio, also contribute to the definition of a democratic government: 1) all the citizens that are of a legal age must have their political rights; 2) all the citizens shall be able to express their opinion through the vote and be free to vote; 3) the vote of all citizens must have an equal weight (one individual = one vote); 4) all citizens shall have real alternatives, this means to be able to choose different solutions; and, 5) no decision taken by the majority shall limit the rights of the minority. *Robert Dahl* considers as a main principle of democracy the fact that all the members of one society are considered and treated as politically equal. In this manner, he introduces the five criteria that secure this principle in a community, without regard of its size. The criteria are: 1) the effective participation, which implies the existence of channels that allow the point of view of each one of the members of the community to be listened by all its members; 2) equality of vote, that implies that in all the elections all the members of the society have the possibility to participate and that their vote counts or has the same weight than the one of the remaining members of the community; 3) the illustrated comprehension that relates to the possibility that all the members of the group are informed and assume a position over the consequences of the decisions they take; 4) control of the agenda, that relates to the existence of the conditions to include issues in the debate that are considered relevant for all and, finally, 5) the inclusion of the adults that refers to a characteristic of universal participation, in order for those that have the right to participate have the possibility to do so. He asserts that a country is a democracy “only if it possesses all the political institutions that pertain to a democracy ” and he specifies which are those institutions that a democratic political system requires on a big scale, this means a polyarchic democracy: a) offices elected by the public, which means that the political, administrative and governmental decisions rely on the public offices elected by the citizens, therefore the democratic governments are representatives; b) free elections, impartial and frequent; c) freedom of speech, that implies that the citizens have the right to express over political issues without being in danger of retaliation; d) access to alternative sources of information, that are not controlled by the government and that the citizens have the right to request; e) autonomy of the associations, related to the fact that the citizens have the right to constitute organization relatively independent, including political parties and independent interest groups, and finally, f) the including citizenship that means that all the adults have rights for instance, to vote, freedom of speech, to access to elected offices, etc. On the other hand, *Giovanni Sartori* has analyzed deeply the concept of democracy and has located two models: the democracy of the ancient and the democracy of the modern times. Among the characteristics. that allow the distinction of a modern democracy there must be pointed out that it is representative and that therefore it assumes the existence of a liberal State – constitutional with a very specific acting instrument: the parties. Also, he declares that democracy shall be defined as a political system based on the popular power where the power is held by the demos and the exercise of the power is entrusted to representatives elected periodically. Thus, a democracy will be a multiple party system in which the majority governs respecting the rights of the minorities. The referred elements, among others, are those who originate the definition of democracy proposed by Sartori, who considers it as a procedure or mechanism, or both, that: a) generates an open polyarchy whose competition is the electoral market; b) attributes the power to the people; and, c) specifically imposes the capability of response of the chosen ones before the voters. Additionally, said theorist proposes some factors that facilitate the arrival of a democracy: the democracy assumes the use of “politics as peace”; the civil society shall be autonomous; the public matters shall be separate from the private; there shall be a secularization of the politics and there shall be plural values. To summarize, it can be said that the institutions are the perfect instrument to structure and categorize a democracy and the political system of any society. And in a very wide sense they can be interpreted as the instances which are responsible to operate this system based on the rules and laws that the society has given itself. Mauricio Merino, researcher and former Electoral Councilor of the IFE considers that: “The main roll of the institutions is to offer certainty, from the rules that make the coexistence possible. From this point of view the institutions fail when instead of certainty they generate uncertainty… All the institutions exist to carry out a certain public function. This means, to comply and have comply certain behavior rules that, in a simple manner, assume that in front of a certain conduct there will always be a consequence.” Thus, in the raisings of Bobbio, Sartori and Dahl, and that are aforementioned; there are common topics among which the following stand out: The existence of rules and procedures; Respect to the decision of the majorities without prejudice of the rights of the minorities; The importance of the representativeness of the governments; The participation of the highest number of citizens possible in the decision making; The importance of the exercise of vote and equity of the same; The existence of a real competence, where there are different options and wide information on those options; The roll that the political parties play as vehicles for the construction of democracies. As it can be observed all these topics are part of the nature of the electoral reforms and of the electoral institutions that were created in Mexico in the last decade of the XX century, including those that correspond to the Federal District. Actually, for the case of the capital of the Mexican republic the reform was a product of intense debate over the need to democratize their governmental instances; debate that initiated from the crisis that was generated by the earthquake of 1985. The result was the modification by the Federal Congress of the cpeum and of the Government Statute of the Federal District (EGDF). Therefore the electoral institutions derived from this reform incorporate in their conception and in the law that sustains them, the elements that Bobbio, Sartori and Dahl, among others, have referred as fundamental in the consolidation of democratic societies.

4. Institutions and political actors

The contemporary political theory has analyzed from different perspectives the roll that the institutions play in the construction or consolidation of democracies. To explain the case of the electoral institutions in the capital of the country it is necessary to have a conceptual referral of democracy.

To explain what democracy means, it is necessary to appeal to, at least, three of the philosophers that have contributed the most to the analysis of this concept: Norberto Bobbio, Giovanni Sartori and Robert Dahl.

Norberto Bobbio has determined what he calls a minimum definition of democracy. Firstly, he considers that when talking about democracy there is a reference to a counter position to all forms of autocratic government. Additionally a democracy is characterized by having a “series of rules (basic or fundamental) that set forth those who are authorized for taking collective decisions and under what procedures”

Also, he points out that there are three conditions in order to be able to establish this minimum definition of democracy: a) The right of direct or indirect participation in the making of collective decisions by the highest number of citizens that is possible, through the exercise of vote; b) the existence of procedural rules, as the rule of the majority that deems the decisions taken by the majority as mandatory for the group; and c) that those who are called to decide or choose those who decide have real alternatives and can choose between one or the other, in order for which they should have their rights of opinion, reunion or associations secured. It is important to say that according to Bobbio, although these rights are part of constitutional provisions, these provisions “are not game rules but instead they are the preliminary rules that allow the development of the game”.

To these three requirements the following suppositions can be added, that, according to Bobbio, also contribute to the definition of a democratic government: 1) all the citizens that are of a legal age must have their political rights; 2) all the citizens shall be able to express their opinion through the vote and be free to vote; 3) the vote of all citizens must have an equal weight (one individual = one vote); 4) all citizens shall have real alternatives, this means to be able to choose different solutions; and, 5) no decision taken by the majority shall limit the rights of the minority.

Robert Dahl considers as a main principle of democracy the fact that all the members of one society are considered and treated as politically equal. In this manner, he introduces the five criteria that secure this principle in a community, without regard of its size. The criteria are: 1) the effective participation, which implies the existence of channels that allow the point of view of each one of the members of the community to be listened by all its members; 2) equality of vote, that implies that in all the elections all the members of the society have the possibility to participate and that their vote counts or has the same weight than the one of the remaining members of the community; 3) the illustrated comprehension that relates to the possibility that all the members of the group are informed and assume a position over the consequences of the decisions they take; 4) control of the agenda, that relates to the existence of the conditions to include issues in the debate that are considered relevant for all and, finally, 5) the inclusion of the adults that refers to a characteristic of universal participation, in order for those that have the right to participate have the possibility to do so.

He asserts that a country is a democracy “only if it possesses all the political institutions that pertain to a democracy ” and he specifies which are those institutions that a democratic political system requires on a big scale, this means a polyarchic democracy: a) offices elected by the public, which means that the political, administrative and governmental decisions rely on the public offices elected by the citizens, therefore the democratic governments are representatives; b) free elections, impartial and frequent; c) freedom of speech, that implies that the citizens have the right to express over political issues without being in danger of retaliation; d) access to alternative sources of information, that are not controlled by the government and that the citizens have the right to request; e) autonomy of the associations, related to the fact that the citizens have the right to constitute organization relatively independent, including political parties and independent interest groups, and finally, f) the including citizenship that means that all the adults have rights for instance, to vote, freedom of speech, to access to elected offices, etc.

On the other hand, Giovanni Sartori has analyzed deeply the concept of democracy and has located two models: the democracy of the ancient and the democracy of the modern times. Among the characteristics. that allow the distinction of a modern democracy there must be pointed out that it is representative and that therefore it assumes the existence of a liberal State – constitutional with a very specific acting instrument: the parties. Also, he declares that democracy shall be defined as a political system based on the popular power where the power is held by the demos and the exercise of the power is entrusted to representatives elected periodically. Thus, a democracy will be a multiple party system in which the majority governs respecting the rights of the minorities.

The referred elements, among others, are those who originate the definition of democracy proposed by Sartori, who considers it as a procedure or mechanism, or both, that: a) generates an open polyarchy whose competition is the electoral market; b) attributes the power to the people; and, c) specifically imposes the capability of response of the chosen ones before the voters.

Additionally, said theorist proposes some factors that facilitate the arrival of a democracy: the democracy assumes the use of “politics as peace”; the civil society shall be autonomous; the public matters shall be separate from the private; there shall be a secularization of the politics and there shall be plural values.

To summarize, it can be said that the institutions are the perfect instrument to structure and categorize a democracy and the political system of any society. And in a very wide sense they can be interpreted as the instances which are responsible to operate this system based on the rules and laws that the society has given itself. Mauricio Merino, researcher and former Electoral Councilor of the IFE considers that:

“The main roll of the institutions is to offer certainty, from the rules that make the coexistence possible. From this point of view the institutions fail when instead of certainty they generate uncertainty… All the institutions exist to carry out a certain public function. This means, to comply and have comply certain behavior rules that, in a simple manner, assume that in front of a certain conduct there will always be a consequence.”

Thus, in the raisings of Bobbio, Sartori and Dahl, and that are aforementioned; there are common topics among which the following stand out:
The existence of rules and procedures;
Respect to the decision of the majorities without prejudice of the rights of the minorities;
The importance of the representativeness of the governments;
The participation of the highest number of citizens possible in the decision making;
The importance of the exercise of vote and equity of the same;
The existence of a real competence, where there are different options and wide information on those options;
The roll that the political parties play as vehicles for the construction of democracies.

As it can be observed all these topics are part of the nature of the electoral reforms and of the electoral institutions that were created in Mexico in the last decade of the XX century, including those that correspond to the Federal District.

Actually, for the case of the capital of the Mexican republic the reform was a product of intense debate over the need to democratize their governmental instances; debate that initiated from the crisis that was generated by the earthquake of 1985. The result was the modification by the Federal Congress of the cpeum and of the Government Statute of the Federal District (EGDF).

Therefore the electoral institutions derived from this reform incorporate in their conception and in the law that sustains them, the elements that Bobbio, Sartori and Dahl, among others, have referred as fundamental in the consolidation of democratic societies.