25 indigenous organization[;] for example, it now has difficulty in obtaining international cooperation funds, which are not forthcoming because it is a political party.” The YATAMA candidates for the 2000 municipal elections were elected according to the “organizational” mechanisms of the indigenous communities in municipal territorial assemblies. In principle, a person may only be a YATAMA candidate once. Consequently, many of the candidates who did not take part in the 2000 municipal elections could not participate in the 2004 municipal elections. “In October 2000,” the Supreme Electoral Council notified YATAMA that it would be unable to participate in the 2000 municipal elections, indicating that “it had not obtained its legal status within the previous six months” and that it had not presented candidates in 80% of the municipalities. This was not true, because YATAMA had obtained is legal status on May 4, 2000, and proposed candidates in “five of the six municipalities” of the RAAN. The RAAS and the RAAN are “distinct and independent” regions and, consequently, the fact that YATAMA had been prevented from participating in the RAAS should not have affected its right to participate in the RAAN. Owing to this exclusion, YATAMA filed an application for amparo before the court of appeal of the North Atlantic district, and the judges ruled in favor of YATAMA. However, the Supreme Court of Justice confirmed the decision of the Supreme Electoral Council. YATAMA’s exclusion from the elections affected the candidates and their families, who had invested money and time, and “stopped working to devote themselves to the [...] political campaign.” It also affected YATAMA, which had “financed the organization of the assemblies, and the indigenous communities that did not have representatives “who they had already selected.” There was absenteeism in the elections; only those living in large urban centers and in “zones where mestizos live” voted. Since the indigenous people had no representatives, “most of the investments and projects were transferred to places when the supporters of those who were elected live.” The communities are not “represented in the Legislature,” although the indigenous people comprise 80% of the population of the RAAN, 20% of the RAAS, and 15% of the national population. Only five deputies represent the RAAN and the RAAS, and they belong to traditional parties; one of them has “an indigenous perspective.” The seven members of the Supreme Electoral Council belong to the traditional political parties and not one of them is an indigenous person. The Electoral Act should be reformed, establishing a “fixed political quota for the indigenous people in the Legislative Assembly and other State bodies.” 2. Nancy Elizabeth Henríquez James, member of the governing body of YATAMA In a resolution of August 15, 2000, the Supreme Electoral Council excluded YATAMA from the 2000 municipal elections, even though YATAMA had fulfilled the requirements established in the Electoral Act and its candidates had been presented within the stipulated time limit. Owing to YATAMA’s exclusion, the indigenous communities “organized protests in the streets of Puerto Cabezas.” The Government responded to these protests by sending in the specialized forces of the National Police.