Electoral law, Senate approves three preferences but the top candidate remains blocked.

The Senate approved an amendment to the electoral law allowing up to three alternating gender preferences, but keeps the top candidate locked, chosen by the parties. The measure came directly to the floor after the Constitutional Affairs Committee failed to complete its review and assign the mandate to the rapporteur.

On the afternoon of September 13, the leaders of the center-right met to seek an urgent agreement on the number of signatures required to submit electoral lists, a rule that puts small or new parties in difficulty. The agreement must be reached by Tuesday, September 15, the date scheduled for the final vote in the Senate.

The opposition contested the management of the review and accused the majority of wanting to compress debate. They submitted 696 amendments and six motions, calling the new law unconstitutional. The game now shifts to the rules that will modify the future balance of power among the parties.

The discussion on the new electoral law began on July 21, 2026, when the Senate's Constitutional Affairs Committee started hearings with constitutional scholars and experts. After a long general debate lasting until August 5, 696 amendments were presented. The electoral law establishes the rules for electing members of parliament, influencing who can run and how much power voters have compared to party headquarters.

The normal legislative process involves the Committee reviewing the law, voting on amendments, and giving a rapporteur a mandate to bring the result to the floor. This time, the process stalled: the Committee could not assign the mandate to the rapporteur, moving the discussion directly to the Senate floor, where numbers and party discipline matter most.

The political battle revolves around two key points: preferences (how many candidates a voter can choose) and the blocked top candidate (a leading candidate chosen by the party, not the voter). The majority defends a system that maintains control over candidates, while the opposition demands more choice for citizens. After the Senate vote, the text must return to the Chamber for final approval, prolonging the confrontation.