The Supreme Election Tribunal (TSE) has presented a curriculum of more than 200 expedients that remain dependent on the resolution of its Section Specialized in Political Beligerancia. These cases, which have accumulated for several years, remained paralyzed due to an unconstitutionality action that put the authorities responsible for dealing with them in suspension, until the Sala Costitucional concluded its analysis.
Among the pending complaints are those filed against the President of the Republic, Rodrigo Chaves, for alleged political beligerancia. These accusations, dating back to the previous year, include one filed by the Partido de Liberación Nacional (PLN) and another Partido Azione Ciudadana (PAC). Miguel Guillén, general secretary of the PLN, addressed the TSE to express his concern about the return to the resolution of these cases, underlining the importance of an appropriate ruling regarding this nature.
Rodrigo Chaves, for his part, has used his public interventions to criticize the main opposition parties, including the PLN, the Partido Unidad Social Cristiana (PUSC), the Frente Amplio and the Partido Liberal Progresista (PLP), insinuating supposed acts of corruption among its leaders. This has generated political tensions which, combined with ongoing complaints, reflect a polarized political landscape heading into the 2026 presidential elections.
Complaints accumulated since 2019
According to Andréi Cambronero, owner of Letrados del TSE, the pending cases began to accumulate since 2019. Aside from the electoral processes —the national elections of 2022 and the municipal elections of 2024—, the complaints continued to be filed with the Special Section of the Tribunal since then pudieran ser results due to the unconstitutionality action that blocked it early.
Although the specialized section continued to receive complaints all this time, it was unable to issue resolutions until the middle of this year, when the Constitutional Hall finally ruled on the case. Initially, the magistrates faced the action of unconstitutionality due to formal defects in their drafting, which forced the applicants to replant it. Mes then, after a new attempt, the action was admitted and resolved, allowing the TSE to restore its functions in this matter.
The activists who presented the action of unconstitutionality challenged four articles of the regulation of the Specialized Section of the TSE, arguing that these provisions contravenían the Constitution. However, in vote 2024-0023861, the Sala Constitucional concluded that there is no unconstitutionality in these regulations. According to the magistrates, the TSE has full competence to establish regulations relating to its electoral function, as well as establish article 10 of the Política Constitution and article 74 of the Ley de Jurisdicción Constitucional.
Exclusive competence of the TSE
Investigating magistrate Jorge Araya was keen to point out that the organization and regulation of electoral processes are the exclusive competence of the TSE. In his resolution he clarified that the provisions adopted by the Supreme Election Tribunal in the exercise of its electoral function cannot be the subject of constitutional action.
«If we consider that the compliance and regulation of these processes are the exclusive responsibility of the TSE in the exercise of its electoral function. According to Article 10 of the Constitution and Article 74 of the Ley de Jurisdicción Constitucional, there is no constitutional action against the provisions of the TSE relating to the exercise of the electoral function,” Araya explained.
Despite the resolution of the Constitutional Hall, the complete text of the sentence is still pending publication, which will allow us to know in detail the foundations of the decision and the provisions of the rules under which the Specialized Section of the TSE will operate in adelante.
Complaint against President Chaves
Among the pending expedients, the complaints against President Rodrigo Chaves, presented by the PLN and the PAC for supuesta beligerancia política, stand out. These accusations have generated widespread debate, since, to prosper, the TSE will have to refer the case to the Legislative Assembly, which would be responsible for determining the steps to follow.
The complaints are linked to Chaves' public statements, in which he used his position to attack opposition parties and their leaders, alleging acts of corruption. These actions could be interpreted as a violation of the rules governing the political neutrality of public officials, especially in the context of electoral processes.
The progress of these managements will be fundamental to define the political impact of the accusations against the president and the possible reaction of the parties involved, who have insisted on the need to guarantee impartiality and transparency in electoral processes.
A tense political landscape
The return to the resolution of political militia cases has accentuated tensions in the national political landscape. With the 2026 presidential election on the horizon, opposition parties and officialdom maintain a climate of confrontation that could intensify as processes advance in the TSE.
The resolution of the gimmicks accumulated since 2019 will not only be crucial in defining any sanctions or corrective measures, but also in hearing precedents in the regulation of the political conduct of public actors. In this context, the TSE faces the challenge of ensuring that its implementation is considered impartial and respected by the Constitution, at a time when trust in institutions is fundamental to democratic stability.
At the moment, the TSE continues to work on the accumulated expedients and on the implementation of the provisions set out by the Sala Costitucional. The publication of the complete failure will allow the mayor to know in detail the implications of the decision and the steps to follow in the most relevant cases, such as complaints against President Chaves.
This process marks a critical point for the consistency of the electoral system, which will have to demonstrate its ability to resolve political conflicts in a fair and transparent way, in an environment where polarization and bloody accusations appear to be the norm.
