78 mayors and councilors presented by the regional indigenous political party YATAMA in the RAAN and the RAAS, “because it had not provided for norms in the Electoral Law that would facilitate the political participation of the indigenous organizations in the different electoral processes of the Atlantic Coast Autonomous Region of Nicaragua, according to the customary law, values, practices and customs of the indigenous people who live there.” 179. Arguments of the representatives In addition to alleging the violation of Article 23 of the Convention, the representatives of the alleged victims alleged that the State had violated Article 24 of the Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, an allegation that does not appear in the application presented by the Commission. Regarding the violation of all these Articles, the representatives proposed the same arguments that are summarized in paragraph 143 of this judgment, and also indicated that: (a) The State violated the political rights embodied in the Convention to the detriment of the candidates presented by YATAMA and of the indigenous communities who had chosen them, because it excluded these candidates from the municipal elections, as a result of the resolution issued by the Supreme Electoral Council on August 15, 2000, and the confirmation of this resolution by the judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of October 25 that year; by “not allowing them to contest the resolution of the CSE, arguing that it referred to ‘electoral matters,’ and by not complying with its own domestic laws that ordered the State to eliminate any barriers that stood in the way of equality among all Nicaraguans and their effective participation in the country’s political, economic and social life”; (b) The candidates of YATAMA could not exercise the political representation of the indigenous organizations and communities that had chosen them according to their customary law, values, practices, and customs, and they could not fulfill their personal and community aspirations or take part in the conduct of public affairs. In addition, “the indigenous communities [...] were unable to be represented by their own members.” “The authorities who were elected on the Atlantic coast do not represent 85% of the voters, most of them indigenous people, who did not vote as a protest for the exclusion of YATAMA. This absence of political representation has had a direct effect on the decisions taken at the municipal level regarding the use and management of resources”; (c) YATAMA was unable to take part in municipal affairs, even though indigenous people are the majority in the Atlantic Autonomous Regions. Moreover, the legal existence of the YATAMA political party was jeopardized; (d) The Statute of Autonomy of the Atlantic Coast Regions “does not guarantee the right of the indigenous people that inhabit this region to play an active part in the decisions that affect them”; (e) The draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People recognizes the right to self-government of the indigenous people and the draft United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People states that they have the right to participate fully, if they so choose, at all levels of decisionmaking in matters which may affect their rights, lives and destinies through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures,