CAFTA Referendum in Costa Rica Postponed

[arcos]

Source: Tico Times

The Supreme Elections Tribunal (TSE) announced yesterday that it is postponing a nationwide referendum on the Central American Free-Trade Agreement with the United States (CAFTA) from Sept. 23 to Oct. 7 as a high court examines whether the assembly violated its procedures in its handling of legislation related to the pact.

Should the justices of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court (Sala IV) find errors in the procedure, the Tribunal would have to call off the referendum, according to TSE interim president Luis Antonio Sobrado.

“It's an unexpected circumstance… one that couldn't have been evaluated in advance,” he told reporters yesterday afternoon.

The cause of that circumstance: a request for a constitutional consulta filed by a group of legislators from the Citizen Action Party (PAC), which leads the fight against the trade pact, and other factions. The Sala IV announced June 1 that it would accept the legislators' request, combining it with a previous request for constitutional review of CAFTA from Ombudswoman Lisbeth Quesada; the court is expected to respond to both consultations by July 5.

<snip>


Read more: http://www.ticotimes.net/dailyarchive/2007_06/0606071.htm

[EFerrari]

1. What do you think will happen, arcos? n/t

[arcos]

3. The likiest scenario is that the referendum will take place...

The Constitutional Chamber is widely considered to be mostly supportive of the government, although they've been known to rule in unexpected ways before. So the most likely result is that they find no problem at all, but we still have to wait a month to see what they rule.

The biggest problem would be if they find no procedural errors but they find that CAFTA itself is unconstitutional. The referendum would take place and CAFTA could be approved even if unconstitutional, and then people would have to go to court again so that it can be struck down.

[Judi Lynn]

2. Sorry to be dense,arcos,but can the government pass CAFTA without a referendum?

It would seem a public referendum on this would indicate the public itself DOESN'T WANT it, if the demonstrations are any indication.

Thanks for sharing the latest information. Hope this turns out right.

[arcos]

4. It is possible, although it is not likely...

There are several possible outcomes:

If the Constitutional Chamber says any procedure was broken when CAFTA was being discussed in Congress, it will have to go back to step one. A Congressional comittee would have hearings again, and it would likely be approved again... from there they could ask for another referendum (which I'd say would take place around February, very near the CAFTA deadline), or they could also use the "fast track" to approve it in Congress, which would take around 4 or 5 months. Either way, I'd dare to say that if that is the ruling, CAFTA is basically dead.

If they rule that no procedures were broken but the CAFTA text itself is unconstitutional, the government has already said they would go ahead with the referendum, as scheduled. This is because the Constitutional Chamber can strike down a law after it has been approved, but when it is not a law yet their opinion is not binding except in procedural matters. So, it's kind of ironic that the President who swore to uphold the Constitution would go ahead pushing for an unconstitutional law, but anyway this ruling would also be a big blow to CAFTA since doubts the undecided voters have would grow.


The likeliest scenario is that the Court finds there is no problem at all with CAFTA. If that's the ruling, the referendum will take place as schedule on October 7, and the people will decide. But even under this scenario, there's a slim chance that the referendum will not settle the matter. For the referendum to be binding, minimum turnout must be either 30% or 40%. The Electoral Tribunal has yet to announce which percentage will be, but even if the NO wins, if there's under a 30 or 40% turnout CAFTA would go back to Congress, where the government says they will push for its approval.

[arcos]

5. Kick, in case someone interested hasn't seen it yet.... n/t