EDRIElection Dispute Resolution Index

Article 117.º, paragraph 2 of Lei n.º 14/79 explicitly enumerates the parties with standing to contest election irregularities in contentious appeal: (1) the person who presented the claim or protest; (2) candidates; (3) their representatives (mandatários); and (4) political parties that compete in the electoral district (círculo). This enumeration is clear and specific, leaving no discretion regarding who may file a contentious appeal. The statute directly answers which actors may appeal decisions on claims and protests arising from voting and vote-counting irregularities.

“Da decisão sobre a reclamação ou protesto podem recorrer, além do apresentante da reclamação, de protesto ou do contraprotesto, os candidatos, os seus mandatários e os partidos políticos que, no círculo, concorrem à eleição.”

Article 118.º explicitly and unambiguously designates the Tribunal Constitucional (Constitutional Court) as the sole forum of original jurisdiction for election contests (recursos) challenging results. The statute specifies: (1) the exact court (Tribunal Constitucional); (2) the timeframe for filing (24 hours from posting of the official tally); (3) procedural alternatives for remote regions (telegraph/telex); and (4) the mandatory timeline for decision (48 hours after response deadline). This satisfies the dual-scholar test for clarity: a neutral observer and an election official would have no ambiguity about which court receives election disputes. The venue specification is both narrow and codified, precisely the model the EDRI framework rewards.

“O recurso é interposto no prazo de vinte e quatro horas, a contar da afixação do edital a que se refere o artigo 112.º, perante o Tribunal Constitucional.”

Article 118(1) of Lei n.º 14/79 specifies a clear, codified filing deadline for election contests (recursos): 24 hours from the posting of the official results notice (edital). The triggering event is defined by statutory reference (Article 112.º), and the timeframe is precise and unambiguous. This satisfies the procedural clarity requirement for contest filing deadlines under CONT.EDRI.3. The statute leaves no discretion regarding when a contest may be filed.

“O recurso é interposto no prazo de vinte e quatro horas, a contar da afixação do edital a que se refere o artigo 112.º”

Art. 34º establishes a formal procedural requirement that appeals must be filed with 'fundamentos' (grounds) and 'todos os elementos de prova' (all proof elements), indicating evidence must accompany the appeal. This codifies a basic standard that evidence must be presented with the contest petition. However, the statute does not establish explicit evidentiary rules—such as burden of proof standards, admissibility thresholds, weight of evidence requirements, or standards for evaluating competing evidence. The provision requires grounds and evidence to be included but does not specify what constitutes sufficient proof, the burden allocation between parties, or how courts should evaluate competing evidence submissions. This satisfies the first component (a standard is set: evidence must accompany grounds) but not the second component (detailed evidentiary rules governing admissibility and evaluation).

“O requerimento de interposição de recurso, do qual devem constar os seus fundamentos, é entregue no tribunal que proferiu a decisão recorrida, acompanhado de todos os elementos de prova.”

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 111.º prescribes a procedural timeline (8 days) and publication mechanism for the official election results map. However, it does not codify recount procedures, triggers for recount, cost allocation, or critically, the legal effect of recount findings. The section addresses post-election reporting of aggregated results rather than dispute resolution, recount mechanics, or the binding/advisory status of recount determinations. It describes what information must be included in the official map but contains no language addressing whether a recount is mandatory, discretionary, or what authority determines recount necessity, and no specification of whether recount findings are binding on certification or merely advisory.

The statute establishes a fixed certification deadline: results must be proclaimed and published by the tenth day after voting. The phrase 'até ao décimo dia posterior ao da votação' (until the tenth day following the voting day) sets a mandatory, non-discretionary timeline. The deadline is codified in the statute and does not depend on administrative discretion. The mechanism (proclamation by the president and publication via notice at the Constitutional Court) is also specified.

“Os resultados do apuramento geral serão proclamados pelo presidente e, em seguida, publicados por meio de edital afixado à porta do Tribunal Constitucional, até ao décimo dia posterior ao da votação.”

Article 99 addresses district-level recount procedures and timing (mandatory 24-hour reconvening requirement), but does not explicitly establish a mechanism to STAY certification pending completion of recounts or disputes. The article prescribes how recounts proceed (based on polling station records and electoral rolls) and mandates resumption within 24 hours if documents are missing, but contains no statutory stay or injunction mechanism that would prevent or delay certification while recount or contest proceedings are ongoing. The criterion requires a codified mechanism to halt certification pending resolution of disputes; this section addresses recount procedure and timing only, not the relationship between recount completion and certification deadlines. A jurisdiction satisfying TIME.2 would explicitly state that certification is stayed or cannot occur until pending recounts/contests are resolved.

“Se faltarem os elementos de algumas das assembleias de voto, iniciar-se-á o apuramento com base nos elementos das assembleias que os enviarem, designando o presidente nova reunião, dentro das 24 horas seguintes, para se concluírem os trabalhos”