A-6877345
Decided by Board February 24, 1950
Expatriation — Voluntarily voting in foreign political election — Section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 — "Political" election construed.
Where a native-born citizen voluntarily voted (in December 1945) in an election for commissar of the Agrarian Community or Ejido of San Bernardo, Guanajuato, Mexico, he has voted in a foreign "political" election within the meaning of section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 (See Matter of M., 2 IN Dec. 427 as to local option "election" in Canada. Also, see 3 IN Dec. 558, 586).
EXCLUDED BY BOARD OF SPECIAL INQUIRY:
Act of 1924 — No immigration visa.
Executive Order 8766 — No passport.
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: This case is before us on appeal from an order entered by the Assistant Commissioner on April 26, 1949, affirming the appellant's exclusion by a Board of Special Inquiry on the above-stated grounds.
The appellant, male, 22 years of age, was born at Copperhill, Ariz., on January 24, 1926, of Mexican parents. He was taken to Mexico by his parents in 1931 and resided there until August 1946. The Assistant Commissioner concludes that the appellant has expatriated himself under the provisions of section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 (voting in a foreign political election). This conclusion is based on appellant's testimony that in December 1945 he voted voluntarily in an election for commissar of the Agrarian Community or Ejido of San Bernardo, Guanajuato, Mexico. The only question before us on this appeal is whether or not the appellant's action, as disclosed by his testimony, amounts to voting in a political election within the meaning of section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940.
In Matter of F----, 56156/450 (determined by the Atty. Gen., Aug. 19, 1946), we were faced with the question of whether voting in a local option election in Canada was voting in a political election in a foreign state and thus constituted an act of expatriation under section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940. The majority of the board held that such voting did not constitute an act of expatriation and set forth at length their views of what constituted a political election under section 401 (e). The dissent likewise set forth the views which they believed should control in determination of the question. Because of the importance of the question presented and as a dissent had been recorded, the case was certified to the Attorney General. The Attorney General in holding that Miss F---- lost her citizenship by participation in the local option election stated, "Whether a local option election is a political election within the meaning of the statute is a question that cannot be regarded as settled until the courts have had occasion to pass upon it and I feel that a judicial decision thereon is desirable."
The appellant in the instant case participated in an election of a commissar or president of the Ejido in which he was living. The Ejido is a type of communal land-holding peculiar to Mexico and therefore in reaching a decision in this case we must make an effort to determine just what part it plays in the overall political setup of the Mexican government. We must also consider the position held by the official for whom the appellant voted to ascertain if his powers and duties are such that he is regarded as a government official and not merely a representative of persons banded together in a cooperative venture. If we find that the Ejido and its government officials are so closely interwoven within the general pattern of the Mexican Federal Government as to be classed a political subdivision or part thereof, we feel there would be no question under either of the views as expressed in Matter of F----, supra, that the appellant participated in a political election.
The Ejido and its governing officials are provided for by the Agrarian Code of the United Mexican States which sets forth the organization and scope of the agrarian and communal landholders and agencies. The articles of the Agrarian Code pertinent to the issue at hand are set out as follows:
CHAPTER ONE
AGRARIAN AND COMMUNAL LAND AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES
ART. 4. The following are the authorities of the groups of communal land residents and of the communities holding lands:
I. — The general assembly.
II. — The community and communal land commissars, and
III. — The executive council.
ART. 17. The general assemblies shall be composed exclusively of communal landowners who have not lost their communal land rights, and shall be deemed to be legally constituted, except in case a second meeting is called, when one more than one-half of the members are present.
ART. 20. In the general assemblies of the communal land residents voting shall be nominal. Whenever the election is for the communal land commissar or the executive committee and the result of such voting is a tie, the voting shall be repeated and if again tied, the Agrarian department, the secretary of agriculture and development or the national communal land credit bank in its case, shall together draw up a plan assigning the posts by lottery between the individuals who have obtained the same number of votes. The members of the commissiariats and the executive councils of communal land settlements can be reelected when they obtain, at least, the two-thirds majority of the assembly.
ART. 22. The communal land commissars shall be elected in a general assembly of the communal land residents by a majority of votes and shall hold office and be composed of three landholding members and three substitutes therefor, and they shall discharge the offices of president, secretary, and treasurer.
CHAPTER TWO
DUTIES OF AGRARIAN COMMUNAL LAND AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES
ART. 42. The duties of the general assembly of communal landholders are:
I. — Elect and remove the members of the communal commissariat and of the executive council, in accordance with the provisions of this code:
II. — Authorize, modify and correct, by due legal form, the decisions of the communal commissariat:
III. — Discuss and approve, as appropriate, in each case the reports rendered by the commissariat and order that the approved statements of accounts be posted in a place visible to the settlement:
IV. — Ask the intervention of the agrarian authorities when requested by and in the interests of the residents, in determining a matter involving suspension or deprivation of rights of members of the communal land settlement:
V. — Hand down decisions relative to the manner in which communal land of the settlement shall be utilized, which decisions shall be approved and implemented where appropriate by the secretary of agriculture or by the national communal credit bank; and
VI. — The further duties that this code and other laws and regulations provide.
ART. 43. The communal land commissars shall have the following duties:
I. — Represent the initial groups of residents before administrative and judicial authorities, under a general mandate of authority:
II. — Upon execution of the order by the governor, or by presidential decree in its stead, take over the lands and the documentation pertaining thereto:
III. — Administer the communal lands in such manner as to maintain a communal regime, under a general grant of authority for all supervising and administrative acts, according to the limitations established by this code:
IV. — Ensure the proper parceling of communal land:
V. — Ensure that individual and collective exploitations is in accordance with the law and decisions of the department, the secretary of agriculture and development and the national communal credit bank:
VI. — Form a part of the administrative council of the local communal land credit community groups:
VII. — Call all of the communal landholding residents to a general assembly, at least once a month, and on every occasion it is requested by their executive council, the Agrarian department, secretary of agriculture, or the national communal credit bank:
VIII. — Render account to the general assemblies of the work performed, the use of the funds and the proposed undertakings:
IX. — Comply with and ensure the compliance with the orders issued by the Agrarian authorities and the general assemblies; and
X. — The further orders of this code and the other laws and regulations applicable.
Although it is difficult to determine the exact nature of the Ejido, it is apparent from a study of the Agrarian code and other material on this subject that it is a part and can be classed as a political subdivision of the Mexican Federal Government. It is true that the Ejido and its governing body have some characteristics of a cooperative venture. However, we feel that it is so integrated within the political structure of the Mexican Federal Government that when the appellant voted in the election for the president of his local Ejido, he was participating in a foreign political election, and as such he has lost his citizenship under section 401 (e) of the Nationality Act of 1940. On this basis the grounds of inadmissibility are sustained and the appeal will be dismissed.
The Ejido — Mexico's Way Out, by Eyler N. Simpson: "The Ejido villages were launched upon a career of what, for lack of a better term, may be called simple collectivism. Ejido lands were to be held and worked in common — all for one and one for all, and no questions raised concerning mine and thine. Ejido villages, like their prototypes of colonial days, were to be wards of the nation. State and municipal authorities might levy taxes, but there, for all practical purposes, their rights over Ejido lands ended. Economic and social control of Ejidos was to be vested immediately in Ejido administrative committees. But the powers of these committees were to be strictly limited by the guarantees of initiative, referendum and recall on the one hand and the direct intervention and supervision of the National Agrarian Commission on the other."
Chapters on the Agrarian question in Mexico by Fernando Gonzales Roa, pp. 151-153: "No difference of opinion apparently exists concerning the jurisdiction of the said Government over Ejidos. The prerogatives of the royal power passed to the nation along with full sovereignty. Full sovereignty resides in the Federal Government and not in the States. Therefore, all rights conferred upon the States by Spanish laws relating to Ejidos are made over to the central government of the republic."
On January 6, 1915, there was created a national Agrarian commission which exercises jurisdiction over the land commission and local boards, thus confirming the legal nature of the question and definitely declares the Ejidos to be subject to federal authority.
Order: It is ordered that the appeal be and the same is hereby dismissed.