ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index

Article 56(2) explicitly codifies contribution limits directly in statute for three categories of private financing: member contributions (2% of public funding), candidate and sympathizer contributions (10% of prior presidential spending cap), and individual sympathizer contributions (0.5% of prior presidential spending cap). The limits are numerically defined and tied to objective benchmarks, not delegated to administrative discretion. This satisfies the statutory grounding requirement for CONT.1.

This section establishes that candidates/aspirants face sanctions for receiving resources from unauthorized persons and for omitting received resources in reports. However, the section does not explicitly codify independent-expenditure rules or third-party spending frameworks—it focuses on candidate-direct violations. Independent expenditure rules would require statutory definition of who qualifies as an independent spender, what spending is permitted, and separate disclosure obligations for non-candidate entities. The section references authorization requirements but does not enumerate the independent-expenditure regime itself.

Article 55(1) of the LGPP explicitly prohibits political parties from receiving contributions from unidentified persons, thereby establishing a clear statutory rule for the treatment of anonymous contributions. The statute defines the disposition: anonymous contributions are simply not permitted. This addresses the criterion's requirement that anonymous-contribution treatment be codified in statute with a defined outcome, even though the mechanism of enforcement (return, forfeiture, rejection) is implicit rather than spelled out in detail.

“Los partidos políticos no podrán recibir aportaciones de personas no identificadas.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 426 establishes the procedural mechanism for the Technical Audit Unit to receive and review income and expense reports from independent candidates, but it does not define or enumerate a disclosure threshold (the monetary amount above which contributions must be reported). The section creates an institutional duty to receive and process reports and addresses information-request procedures, but contains no statutory specification of the threshold amount that triggers reporting obligations.

The statute enumerates specific filing deadlines: quarterly reports within 30 days of quarter-end (art. 78.1.a.I) and annual reports within 60 days of December 31 (art. 78.1.b.I). These are statutory, not delegated to regulation or administrative discretion. The filing schedule is clearly codified with precise temporal markers.

Article 55 establishes a statutory prohibition on anonymous contributions (requiring persons to be 'identified'), which satisfies the foundational principle of contributor identity disclosure. However, the statute does not enumerate which specific identity elements must be disclosed (name, address, occupation, employer) or above what contribution threshold disclosure applies. The section provides the rule but lacks the procedural detail—field-by-field requirements and monetary thresholds—that DISC.3 requires for a full score.

“Los partidos políticos no podrán recibir aportaciones de personas no identificadas.”

The section requires political parties to publish information on their websites and mandates that filings be made publicly available through the Institute's website, establishing a statutory obligation for online accessibility. However, it does not specify a defined timeline for publication (e.g., 'within X days of filing'), which is essential to meet DISC.4. The statute delegates specifics to implementing legislation ('la ley de la materia'), leaving the operative deadline undefined in this section.

The statute codifies a detailed civil penalty schedule in statutory form, specifying monetary sanctions (multas) calibrated to the Unidad de Medida y Actualización for different categories of subjects (parties, candidates, individuals), with differentiated amounts and explicit provisions for reincidence multipliers and proportional excess-spending penalties. Criminal grades are referenced implicitly in the cancellation of political registration (arts. 456.a.V, 456.b.III), which constitute higher-order sanctions akin to criminal consequences. The framework is statutorily grounded and exhaustively enumerated for civil penalties.

The section establishes that the head of the Technical Audit Unit (campaign-finance enforcement body) is appointed by the General Council under procedures prescribed in article 191(1)(e), with specified professional qualifications, rather than by a single political branch or at the discretion of in-cycle officials. The reference to multi-branch procedural requirements and fixed qualification standards demonstrates statutory protection from direct political control.

Article 465(1) explicitly grants any person (and legal entities through their representatives) a private right to file complaints or denunciations for alleged violations of electoral law, including campaign-finance violations. The statute establishes clear procedural requirements for such complaints (filing forms, documentation, proof submission) and creates a defined administrative review process, satisfying the statutory grounding and enforcement mechanism required for ENF.3.

Article 54(1)(d) explicitly prohibits foreign natural and legal persons ('personas físicas o morales extranjeras') from making contributions or donations to political parties, candidates, or aspirants to elective office. The prohibition is codified directly in statute with clear enumeration of prohibited foreign sources, satisfying the statutory grounding requirement for FOR.1. No administrative discretion is inserted; the rule is categorical and self-executing.

“Los partidos políticos, personas físicas o morales extranjeras”

The statute explicitly prohibits contributions from foreign persons (both natural and legal) in Article 401(d), providing clear statutory grounding for restricting foreign sources. However, the section does not address indirect channels such as foreign-controlled domestic entities, pass-through arrangements, or corporate-ownership tracing, which limits the comprehensiveness of the foreign-source restriction to direct foreign actors only.

“Los partidos políticos, personas físicas o morales extranjeras”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section concerns voter registration procedures in the Federal Electoral Register (LGIPE art. 140), establishing data-collection requirements for electoral-roll administration. It contains no campaign-finance provisions, no contribution-verification procedures, no attestation requirements for campaign donors, and no foreign-source verification mechanisms. The criterion FOR.3 addresses campaign-committee verification of contributor nationality; this section addresses citizen registration for voting eligibility.

The section establishes that the Technical Audit Unit must receive and review income/expense reports and supporting documentation, demonstrating a statutory framework for record-handling and oversight. However, the section does not explicitly specify the duration for which records must be retained (no defined retention period in years/months) nor does it directly impose a retention obligation on candidates themselves—it only prescribes the Unit's duty to receive and review reports. The statute delegates detailed accounting rules to administrative norms (subsection b), leaving the specific retention schedule to sub-statutory regulation rather than statutory enumeration.

The statute grants the Technical Audit Unit power to audit party finances and independent candidate records, establishing audit as a statutory function. However, the section does not specify the trigger mechanism for audits (random sample, threshold, or routine cycle), audit frequency, post-election timing, or how records must be retained for audit access. The audit authority exists in statute but lacks the procedural enumeration necessary for clear, predictable audit deployment.