“I find the present action entirely well-founded and proven, and, consequently, annul the electoral act held on November 29, 2024, for the election of the organs of the Respondent Entity,” reads the sentence from the Administrative Court of the Circle (TAC) of Lisbon.
Contacted, the Portuguese Psychologists Association (OPP) announced plans to appeal the TAC of Lisbon’s decision, which nullifies the elections due to claims that the voting table was not operational during the established schedule due to access difficulties to the ballot.
“The OPP is convinced that, from the standpoint of both fact and law, the matter was not well decided in the first instance, and will, therefore, appeal to the South Central Administrative Court,” the organization stated in a written response.
The ruling indicates that if the voters who opted for remote voting were unable to do so because of issues with accessing the ballot with provided credentials—an issue not attributable to them—it implies that the voting table did not operate according to the established rules and schedule.
“In this case, as the voting table is not operational, there is a violation” of the OPP electoral regulations “and, consequently, the act resulting from it is invalid, meaning the election results are invalid,” according to the judicial decision.
The court also confirmed that “there were at least 218 cases of voters unable to access the electronic ballot with the initially provided codes.”
The legal action was filed by Ana Conduto, who led ‘List A’ in the elections for the position of OPP president, alongside Vítor Coelho, Tiago Fonseca, and Luís Gonçalves, candidates from the same list and members of the electoral committee, who had already lodged a complaint with the OPP Electoral Board on December 3, requesting the election’s annulment and the publication of “a conclusive report detailing the identified failures.”
The petitioners claimed they were forced to file contentious proceedings with the TAC following the OPP Electoral Board’s decision.
“This decision was not taken lightly but rather based on solid grounds and respect for principles of legality, transparency, and impartiality, which are essential pillars for the credibility of the electoral process and which List A has always advocated,” they stated in a note addressed to psychologists at the time.
Regarding the reasons for turning to the court, they argue that there is a “conflict of interest and impartiality,” considering that “the composition of the Electoral Board raised doubts about the impartiality of its members.”
They also cited “irregularities in the electoral process,” noting “significant failures, including the issuance and re-issuance of codes for electronic voting, as well as the inability of several OPP members with codes to vote, which compromised many people’s voting rights.”
The Portuguese Psychologists Association, which was notified of the decision late on Monday afternoon, emphasized that, throughout this process, it “will continue to work to provide all necessary services to its members and fulfill everything defined in the Statute, fully complying with the OPP’s mission, as it has always done.”
According to OPP data, Sofia Ramalho, the leader of ‘List B,’ won the elections for the 2025-2028 term with 2,824 votes, while Ana Conduto’s ‘List A’ garnered 2,704 votes, and Eduardo Carqueja’s ‘List C’ received 1,634 votes.
