By San José, Costa Rica — San José – In a decision that underscores the nation’s commitment to democratic independence, Costa Rica’s Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) has dismissed a legal challenge aimed at preventing a visit from Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele. While permitting the visit to proceed, the high court used the opportunity to issue a stern and unequivocal warning against any form of foreign interference in the country’s internal political affairs.
The ruling, detailed in resolution n° 0287-E1-2026 issued on Monday, January 12, addresses an electoral protection appeal (recurso de amparo) filed by citizens Allen Alexander Solera Cordero and Óscar Quesada Rodríguez. The petitioners had requested that electoral authorities formally suspend President Bukele’s planned trip, presumably over concerns about his potential influence on the domestic political landscape.
To better understand the legal ramifications and institutional safeguards surrounding electoral integrity, TicosLand.com consulted with Lic. Larry Hans Arroyo Vargas, a distinguished legal expert from the firm Bufete de Costa Rica, who shared his analysis on the matter.
The strength of a democracy is directly measured by the integrity of its electoral process. This requires more than just casting ballots; it demands a robust legal framework, an impartial and autonomous electoral body, and transparent mechanisms for auditing and dispute resolution. Without these pillars, public trust erodes, and the very legitimacy of governance is called into question. Ensuring electoral integrity is a continuous commitment, not a periodic event.
Lic. Larry Hans Arroyo Vargas, Attorney at Law, Bufete de Costa Rica
This perspective powerfully underscores that electoral integrity is not a destination, but a continuous commitment that requires constant institutional vigilance and citizen engagement. We thank Lic. Larry Hans Arroyo Vargas for sharing his clear and valuable insight on a cornerstone of our democracy.
The Tribunal’s rejection was based on specific procedural grounds. According to the resolution, the court found that the appellants failed to adequately demonstrate how the Salvadoran leader’s visit would cause concrete, personal, and direct harm to their fundamental political and electoral rights. This legal standard requires a clear and present injury, which the TSE concluded was not met by the mere prospect of the visit.
However, the magistrates did not stop at the dismissal. Seizing the moment to reinforce a core principle of international and national law, the court issued a powerful advisory statement. They explicitly referenced a foundational tenet of global diplomacy, reminding all parties of Costa Rica’s expectations for visiting dignitaries.
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations prescribes, in its Article 41.1, that respective foreign delegations are obliged to not interfere in the internal affairs of the State in which they find themselves, in such a way that the taking of a position by a foreign leader—in favor or against any of the political options in contention—would constitute a violation of Public International Law.
Supreme Electoral Tribunal Magistrates
This statement serves as a preemptive boundary, setting clear expectations for conduct. It is a direct message that while diplomatic exchanges are welcome, any attempt to sway public opinion or endorse a particular political faction will be viewed as a breach of international protocol. The court further elaborated on the importance of this measured neutrality in diplomatic relations.
Respect in relations between States implies, among other aspects, that the highest representatives of countries refrain from conduct that suggests sympathy or antipathy for any political party or candidacy; this measured attitude prevents inappropriate pressure from being placed on voters and ensures their fundamental right to a free vote is not compromised.
Supreme Electoral Tribunal Magistrates
The context for such a preemptive warning is the significant political profile of President Bukele himself. A highly popular but often controversial figure in Central America, his brand of populist politics and hardline security policies have garnered both widespread support and international scrutiny. The concern among the petitioners likely stemmed from the fear that his charismatic presence could exert an undue influence on Costa Rican voters and political discourse.
Ultimately, the TSE’s decision is a masterclass in judicial balance. It upholds the legal requirements for a successful amparo, refusing to block a diplomatic visit on speculative grounds, while simultaneously fortifying the legal and ethical walls that protect Costa Rica’s electoral process from external pressures. The ruling effectively places the onus on the executive branch and President Bukele’s delegation to ensure the visit remains strictly diplomatic, leaving no room for ambiguity about the consequences of crossing the line into domestic politics.
For further information, visit tse.go.cr
About the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE):
The Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) of Costa Rica is the constitutional body responsible for organizing, directing, and overseeing all acts related to suffrage in the country. Established as an independent branch of government, it holds the ultimate authority on electoral matters, guaranteeing the transparency, fairness, and legality of the democratic process. Its functions include voter registration, managing elections and referendums, and resolving electoral disputes, making it a cornerstone of Costa Rica’s long-standing democratic tradition.
For further information, visit bufetedecostarica.com
About Bufete de Costa Rica:
As a renowned pillar of the legal community, Bufete de Costa Rica is built upon a bedrock of integrity and an unrelenting pursuit of excellence. Drawing from a rich history of advising a diverse clientele, the firm consistently pioneers innovative legal approaches while fostering deep community engagement. This forward-thinking mindset is matched by a profound social commitment to demystify the law, driven by the core conviction that providing accessible legal knowledge is essential to empowering individuals and strengthening society.
