Nomination procedures are those that establish the eligibility of candidates to be included on a ballot. In most countries, candidates register with an endorsement of a political party (or affiliation to a political party or grouping), especially under a list-proportional representation system, while some systems permit independent candidates.[1]

While the qualifications for nomination vary from country to country, consideration needs to be given to whether the rules directly or indirectly discriminate against women. For example, if the candidacy deposit is set too high, candidates from poorer sectors may be discouraged or prevented from registering. As women constitute the majority of poor in most countries, this requirement may indirectly disadvantage women candidates. Consideration also needs to be given to laws with quota provisions requiring that a certain proportion of nominated candidates should be women or from other under-represented groups, or laws mandating a reduction in public campaign finance allocations if a certain proportion of candidates are not women.[2]

More than 80 countries have legislated TSM in the form of gender quotas, which are aimed at increasing the number of elected women to decision-making bodies, notably parliaments. In many countries, the authority to monitor and enforce compliance with gender quotas rests with the body charged with candidate nominations, often the EMB. In some others, the judiciary is in charge of verifying compliance of candidate lists with gender quota requirements and, under certain circumstances, it can reject the list of candidates if parties do not comply with the rules. An interesting trend has emerged in Latin America with electoral tribunals robustly interpreting electoral quota legislation to ensure political parties’ compliance.[3]

Political finance reforms have been adopted in 27 countries with the explicit purpose of increasing female candidatures and addressing gender inequality through the system of public funding. These reforms mainly target the candidacies of women by political parties, where public funding is used as an incentive or penalty for compliance or non-compliance with certain levels of women’s representation and a portion of funds is either allocated or reduced in line with this representation targets. Where EMBs have responsibility for overseeing campaign finance, they are often also responsible for implementing these laws.[4]

Example: In Kyrgyzstan, as amended in 2011, the Electoral Law specifies a 30-percent quota for either sex on electoral lists (Code on Elections, Article 60 [3]). 
Lists that fail to meet the quota requirement will be rejected by the Electoral Commission (Code on Elections 2011, Article 61 [3]). No more than three positions can separate men and women (Code on Elections 2011, Article 60 [3]).[5]

Example: In Mexico, the Electoral Tribunal (TEPJF, Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación) has issued a number of sentences with a robust interpretation of the gender quota legal requirements, in order to ensure compliance in the candidate registration process. The TEPJF voted to reject the candidate lists of five different parties and 
two coalitions competing for seats in the 2012 elections if they did not correct their lists to meet the 40 percent quota. Before the Tribunal’s decision, women represented 28 percent of the candidates on the majority electoral list and 40.2 percent of the candidates on the proportional representation list. Following the 2012 decision, those percentages rose to 41.5 percent and 49.5 percent, respectively.[6]

In 2011, the TEPJF issued a sentence according to which incumbent and substitute candidates must be of the same gender. This ruling sought substantive equality, in order to avoid the political phenomenon known as “Las Juanitas”, by which political parties forced elected women to resign in favor of their male substitutes after the election, while apparently complying with formal requirements of the gender quota during candidate registration.[7]

In 2018, the TEPJF issued a sentence in favor of the complaint of the Colectivo por la Ciudadanía de las Mujeres, Colectivos Muxes y de la Diversidad Sexual against the agreement of the State Electoral Institute of Oaxaca that validated the registry of candidates who were supposedly transgender. The complaint made by women’s associations and LGBTI groups explained that a number of registered candidates pretended to be transgender to fit in the candidate list according to quota requirements. The sentence of the TEPJF canceled 15 out of the 17 impugned candidatures. It should be noted that the INE developed a protocol to promote the participation of trans voters in Mexico.[8]

Example: In Peru, the National Jury of Elections (Jurado Nacional de Elecciones) ruled (decision 721-2010-JNE, 26 July 2010) that the percentage of women on a party’s electoral
 list could be rounded up to the next integer. For example, if a party presents a list with 29.6 percent of women, it would be taken as 30 percent. The Tribunal also ruled (670-2010- JNE, 23 July 2010) that a party list will still be declared invalid if certain candidates decide to withdraw their candidacies even after the list 
is approved.[9]

Example: In Burkina Faso, lists of candidates must include at least 30 percent of either sex (Law on Quotas, Article 3). 
If a party reaches or exceeds the 30 percent quota, it will receive additional funding (Law on Quotas, Article 5 & 6). 
If a political party fails to meet the quota provision, its public funding for election campaigns will be cut by 50 percent. (Law on Quotas, Article 5 & 6).[10]

Example: In Ireland, according to the Electoral Act 1997 section 17,
 as amended by the Electoral (Political Funding) Act 2012 section 42, the political parties, after the 
implementation of the law in national elections, will lose 50 percent of their state funding, unless at least 30 percent of their candidates are women and at least 30 percent are men. After a period of seven years, the political parties should have a 40 percent gender quota in their candidate lists in order receive full state funding.[11]