29 109. Article 80(1)(d) of the same law provides that the judicial action may be filed by the citizen when: He considers that his political and electoral right to be elected has been violated, when, having been proposed by a political party, his registration as a candidate to an elected office is unduly denied (italics added). 110. The Court underscores that it is important that States regulate judicial recourses so that the individual has legal certainty and guarantees of his conditions of access. After examining the arguments and the evidence provided, particularly the laws and the case law submitted by the State on the requirements to ensure the validity of the proceedings, the Court understands that the requirements for filing the judicial protection proceedings are always those established in Article 79 of the Law on Contesting Electoral Matters and, in certain cases, also the factual assumptions for admissibility established in Article 80 thereof. The Court observes that, in the same case law provided by the State, the Electoral Tribunal clarifies that “from the interpretation of the word ‘when,’ in Article 80(1) of the Law on Contesting Electoral Matters, it is clear that it is used as an adverb of time and with the meaning of ‘at the time,’ ‘at the moment,’ ‘on the occasion that,’ because all the subparagraphs that follow this expression refer to the fact that the action can be filed at the time or moment when the facts observed in each hypothesis occurred”32 (italics added). 111. In other words, every citizen has active legal capacity to file the recourse under Article 79; but when he himself alleges specific violations of his political rights “the action can be filed at the time or moment at which the facts observed in each hypothesis occurred” according to Article 80, which implies that the conditions referred to in this Article of the Law on Contesting Electoral Matters are really only de facto assumptions, that condition the admissibility of the judicial action for the protection of the political and electoral rights of the citizen. Article 80 imposes the condition that the citizen has been postulated by a political party and, in that capacity, his registration as a candidate for elected public office has been denied. 112. As the Court observes, in addition to the fact that both Article 79 and Article 80 of the Law on Contesting Electoral Matters are in the chapter “On admissibility,” a distinction is made between the general requirements for admissibility of the judicial action for protection and the specific assumptions that, in certain cases, condition this admissibility in relation to political and electoral rights. Regarding admissibility, the action must be filed by an individual and it is not necessary that the person files it under the auspices of a political party, as the State maintains when affirming that the requirements of admissibility are those in Article 79 of the Law on Contesting Electoral Matters. However, the law establishes and the case law of the Electoral Tribunal has ratified, that a condition sine qua non that must be complied with by anyone specifically claiming his right to be elected is to have been proposed by a political party prior to the refusal to register him as a candidate for public office. This condition, even though it is not a requirement for the general admissibility of the judicial action according to Article 79, conditions its admissibility when the undue refusal to register a candidacy for elected office is alleged, which means that the action for the protection of political and electoral rights is only accessible, as regards the political right to be elected, to individuals who were proposed by a political party and not to any person entitled to political rights. 32 Cf. Case law J.02/2000 of the Superior Chamber of the Electoral Tribunal of the Federal Judiciary (final arguments of the State, merits file, tome IV, folios 1256 and 1257).