Democracy in Costa Rica
- Jul 5
- 4 min read
Updated: Jul 8
Who chooses who runs in the election? Costa Rica's experience shows why the choice of candidates should also be democratic.
When we talk about democracy, the most common image is that of voters going to the polls to choose their representatives. However, there is a prior step that receives much less attention, although it is crucial to the entire electoral process: who chooses the candidates who will appear on the ballot?
The answer seems simple: political parties. But the way this choice is made can vary significantly between democracies.
In some countries, the selection of candidates is concentrated in the decisions of the party leadership. In others, efforts are made to ensure that the members themselves participate directly in this process, through assemblies, conventions, or internal elections. After all, if the voter can only choose from the candidates presented to them, the quality of democracy also depends on how those candidates were chosen . It was precisely this concern that led Costa Rica to adopt a solution little known outside of Central America.
Article 98 of the Costa Rican Constitution stipulates that political parties are fundamental instruments of political participation and establishes that their internal structure and functioning must be democratic. Democracy, therefore, is not only required of elections organized by the State, but also of the internal life of the party organizations themselves.
This constitutional guideline did not remain merely on paper. The Costa Rican Electoral Code mandates that parties maintain an Internal Electoral Tribunal , an organ responsible for organizing, administering, and overseeing their internal electoral processes in accordance with the principles of impartiality, objectivity, and transparency.
Furthermore, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) , the highest authority in Costa Rican electoral justice, has consolidated the understanding that the internal democracy of parties has constitutional relevance. In several decisions, it has recognized that parties play an essential role in shaping the popular will and that their internal rules must respect the democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution , and that their actions may be subject to control by the Electoral Court when there is an allegation of violation of these principles.
This does not mean that the system is perfect or that internal conflicts cease to exist. As in any consolidated democracy, debates continue to arise regarding the effective participation of members, the transparency of internal procedures, and the interpretation of party rules. The aspect that differentiates the Costa Rican experience is another: the internal democracy of parties has ceased to be merely a political expectation and has become a constitutional principle accompanied by institutional mechanisms designed to give it effect.
This constitutional guideline did not remain merely at the level of principles. On July 24, 2019, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) of Costa Rica published Resolution No. 4808-E8-2019 , in response to a query submitted by the Unidad Social Cristiana Party (PUSC) regarding the limits of its party leadership's actions in internal candidate selection processes.
Among the questions presented to the Court were the possibility of altering rules for registering pre-candidacies after the start of the internal dispute, reopening deadlines that had already passed, and modifying decisions of the party's own Internal Electoral Court.
In responding to the inquiry, the Court reaffirmed that the rules governing an internal electoral dispute must be clearly defined before the process begins and cannot be modified during its execution, precisely to preserve equality among participants, legal certainty, and the transparency of internal elections. It also emphasized that the Internal Electoral Court possesses functional and administrative autonomy, and is not subordinate to the party leadership in carrying out its duties.
The Costa Rican model assumes that the selection of candidates should occur through democratic processes with the participation of party members , not simply by the will of its leadership. However, the Electoral Court itself recognizes exceptional situations in which the party's superior assembly can directly nominate candidates. This occurs, for example, when, after the registration period for the internal election has ended, there are no interested members who meet the previously established requirements for a given candidacy.
In these limited circumstances, direct nomination serves as a subsidiary measure to prevent the vacancy from remaining unfilled, and not as a replacement for the general rule of democratic participation by members.
In practice, Resolution No. 4808-E8-2019 reinforced an essential principle of Costa Rican internal democracy: the selection of candidates must follow rules previously known to all participants, preserving the participation of members, equal opportunities, and the transparency of the process . Thus, the internal democracy of parties ceased to represent merely a constitutional ideal and became an effective parameter of control exercised by the Electoral Court.
High-Tech Society – Analysis
The Costa Rican experience invites a reflection that rarely occupies space in public debate. Democracy does not begin when the voter chooses between the presented candidates. It begins earlier, at the moment when those candidates are chosen by the political parties themselves.
Regardless of the model adopted by each country, the Costa Rican experience demonstrates that strengthening the internal democracy of parties does not mean limiting their autonomy, but rather recognizing that parties perform an essential public function: selecting the individuals who will later be subject to the sovereign judgment of the electorate.
Ultimately, the quality of democracy depends not only on the freedom to vote, but also on how those who will compete for the trust of society are chosen.
By Luiz Cincurá
Founder and Editor
Editorial transparency: This article was produced with the support of ChatGPT during the research and preliminary content organization stages. The definition of the editorial approach, critical analysis, technical review, and final writing were carried out by the Editor, who is ultimately responsible for the published content.
Sources:
POLITICAL CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA . Article 98.
MORA BARAHONA, Iván. Dialectics between internal democracy and the self-government of political parties in the nomination of candidates for popular election posts. Revista de Derecho Electoral, Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones, Republic of Costa Rica, n. 29, 1st semester of 2020. DOI: 10.35242/RDE_2020_29_14.
SUPREME COURT OF ELECCIONES (TSE), REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA. Electoral Regulations.
SUPREME ELECTORAL COURT (TSE), REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA. RESOLUTION No. 4808-E8-2019.
SUPREME COURT OF ELECCIONES (TSE), REPUBLIC OF COSTA RICA. Relevant resolutions: Political parties.
Comments