After identifying a lack of attention to electoral courts and post-electoral contestation of elections, this article seeks to compensate for the lack of comparative cross-national data on election dispute resolution by constructing ideal types of electoral court success and failure within one country, Mexico, where primary research has produced needed data. It exposes authoritarian incumbent/opposition bargaining over rules of Mexico's democratic transition in the resolution of post-electoral conflicts in Mexico's municipalities. In identifying legal versus extra-legal paths of post-electoral contestation, it conceives of a “rule of law” ratio—the ratio of extra-legal post-electoral conflicts to legal electoral court case filings—to indicate gradual increases in opposition party compliance with electoral institutions. Upon establishing the lag between the construction of electoral institutions and compliance with them, the article concludes that this gap is attributable to conditions beyond their mere institutional configurations, such as social and political factors, and demonstrates that such compliance with institutions may not be assumed.
Federal Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of the Federation (1998). Memoria 1997—Tomo II. Mexico City: Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación (tepjf).
2.
Federal Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of the Federation (1999). “Synthesis of 1998 Constitutional Revision Judgements.” Mexico City: Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación, (unpublished).
3.
Veracruz Tribunal of Electoral Controversies (1989). Criterios y Resoluciones—Elecciones Municipales 1988. Xalapa: Tribunal de lo Contensioso Electoral del Estado de Veracruz.
4.
Zacatecas Electoral Commission (1992). Memoria del Proceso Electoral 1992. Zacatecas: Comisión Electoral del Estado de Zacatecas.
5.
Alcántara, J.M. pan faction member in Guanajuato State Legislature and national coordinator of state legislators, pan Executive Committee. 17 June 1996, Guanajuato.
6.
Castillo Peraza, C. Former national pan president. 16 August 1996, Mexico City.
7.
Colome Ramírez, D. President, Tabasco State Electoral Tribunal. 19 January 1996, Villahermosa.
8.
Guzmán, E. Electoral affairs director, prd Chiapas. 23 May 1996, Soyalo and Tuxtla Gutierrez.
9.
Jiménez Pérez, E. Tabasco Electoral Tribunal magistrate. 18 January 1996, Villahermosa.
10.
López Obrador, A M. prd Tabasco formal gubernatorial candidate. 14 January 1996, Villahermosa.
11.
Macías Solís, O. President, Zacatecas Electoral Tribunal. 26 February 1998, Zacatecas.
12.
Martínez, G. Judicial affairs director, pan National Executive Committee. 8 December 1995, Mexico City.
13.
Moreno Uriegas, M. A. Senator and former pri national president. 19 February 1996, Mexico City.
14.
Nuñez Jiménez, A. Former director of the Federal Electoral Institute (ife) and under-secretary of government, Interior Secretariat. 18 August 1996, Mexico City.
15.
Renedo Dorantes, J.A. President, Campeche Electoral Tribunal. 12 May 1998, by telephone from Mexico City.
16.
Schleske Tiburcio, J. Notary public and former Federal Electoral Tribunal Magistrate of the Veracruz Circuit. 30 April 1998, by telephone from Mexico City.
17.
* Appointments listed are those held at time of interview.
18.
Alvarez de Vicencio, M.E. (1995). Municipio y Democracia—Tesis y prácticas de gobierno del Partido Acción Nacional. Mexico City: Epessa.
19.
Aziz Nassif, A. and J. Molinar Horcasitas (1990). “Los Resultados Electorales.” In Segundo Informe Sobre la Democrácia: México el 6 de Julio de 1988 (P. González Casanova, ed.), pp. 138-171. Mexico City: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
20.
Báez Rodríguez, F. (1994). “Las piezas perdidas.” In Elecciones a Debate: 1988—Las actas electorales perdidas. (A. Sánchez Gutiérrez, ed.), pp. 19-36. Mexico City: Editorial Diana.
21.
Bruhn, K. (1997). Taking on Goliath: The Emergence of a New Left Party and the Struggle for Democracy in Mexico. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
22.
Carrillo Tejeda, M. (1991). “De 86 recursos interpuestos en el tce sólo dos fueron resueltos en favor de los demandantes.”El Dictámen de Veracruz, 5December, 1-D.
23.
Choe, Y. (1997). “How to Manage Free and Fair Elections: A Comparison of Korea, Sweden and the United Kingdom.” Göteborg University, Department of Political Science.
24.
Crespo, J.A. (1996). Votar en los Estados: Análisis comparado de las legislaciones electorales estatales en México. Mexico City: Miguel Angel Porrúa.
25.
Eisenstadt, T.A. (1998). “Courting Democracy in Mexico: Party Strategies, Electoral Institution-Building, and Political Opening.”phd dissertation in political science, University of California, San Diego.
26.
Eisenstadt, T.A. (2000). “Eddies in the Third Wave: Protracted Transitions and Theories of Democratization.”Democratization, 7 (3): 3-24.
27.
Eisenstadt, T.A. (n.d.). “Courting Democracy: Party Strategies and Electoral Institutions in Mexico's Protracted Transition.” University of New Hampshire, Durham. Typescript.
28.
Elklit, J. and A. Reynolds (2000). “The Impact of Election Administration on the Legitimacy of Emerging Democracies: A New Research Agenda.”96th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (apsa), Washington, dc, 31 August-3 September.
29.
Gillman, H. (1997). “Placing Judicial Motives in Context: A Response to Lee Epstein and Jack Knight.”Law and Courts Newsletter, 7 (2): 10-13.
30.
Hartlyn, J. (2000). “Electoral Institutions, Democratic Actors and Free Elections: The Dominican Republic in Comparative Perspective.”96th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (apsa), Washington, dc, 31 August-3 September.
31.
International Foundation for Electoral Systems (ifes) (1999). “Experience Gained from [Indonesia's] June Elections: Resolving Complaints and Disputes in the Election Process.” ifes, Washington, dc. Typescript.
32.
López-Pintor, R. (n.d.). “Electoral Management Bodies as Institutions of Governance.” United Nations Development Programme, New York.
33.
Molina, I. and F.E. Lehoucq (1999). “Political Competition and Electoral Fraud: A Latin American Case Study.”Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 30(2): 199-234.
34.
National Action Party (pan) (1990). “Iniciativas de la Ley Presentadas por el Partido Acción Nacional.”pan, Mexico City.
35.
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (ndi) and the African-American Institute (aai) (1992). “An Evaluation of the June 21, 1992 Elections in Ethiopia.” ndi, Washington, dc.
36.
National Democratic Institute (ndi) (1994). “The 1993 Elections in Pakistan.” ndi, Washington, dc.
37.
National Republican Institute for International Affairs (nri) and National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (ndi) (1989). “The May 7, 1989 Panamanian Elections.” nri and ndi, Washington, dc.
38.
Pastor, R.A. (1999a). “A Brief History of Electoral Administration.” In The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. (A. Schedler, L. Diamond, and M. F. Plattner, eds), pp. 75-82. Boulder, co: Lynne Rienner.
39.
Pastor, R.A. (1999b). “The Role of Electoral Administration in Democratic Transitions: Implications for Policy and Research.”Democratization, 6 (4): 1-27.
40.
Sadek, M.T.A. (1995). A Justica Eleitoral e a Consolidacao da Democracia no Brasil. Sao Paulo: Konrad Adenauer Stiftung.
41.
Schedler, A. (2000). “Incertidumbre institucional e inferencias de imparcialidad: El caso del Instituto Federal Electoral.”Política y Gobierno, 7 (2): 383-421.
42.
Schmidt, G.D. (2000). “The 2000 Peruvian Election: Fujimori's Pyrrhic Victory and What's `Fairness' Got to Do with It?: Delineating Electoral Democracy.”72nd Annual Meeting, Southern Political Science Association (spsa), Atlanta, ga, 8-11 November.
