PDF (Español)
FLIP
How to Cite
Agudelo Agudelo, C. A. . (2021). The Colombian Constitutional Court from a Prodemocratic Reading. Jurídicas, 18(1), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.17151/jurid.2021.18.1.2
More Citation Formats
Authors
Abstract
This article has four parts. The first one shows the reception of the “Countermajoritarian Difficulty” (CMD) in Colombia, it is to say, how the tension between judges an democracy,
a constitutional topic created by Alexander Bickel in America, was received. The second part explains the answer that constitutional judges in Colombia gave to the tension with the
democratic principle by promoting dialogical rulings. The third one describes, in a general way, the LGTBI movement in Colombia and dialogues it generated in the Constitutional
Court to achieve the protection of their rights against majorities. Finally, in the fourth part, some jurisprudence lines of the Colombian Court are shown to demonstrate how it promotes, collaborates, and aids democracy when this is not granted by the representatives.
Keywords:
References
Agudelo, C.A. (2014). La Democracia de los Jueces: La “rama menos peligrosa” como poder prodemocrático en la práctica constitucional. Leyer.
Agudelo, C.A. (2017). La tensión entre la democracia y los jueces. In M.C. Jiménez & P.B. Arboleda (Eds.), La garantía judicial de la Constitución: la relación entre los jueces, los derechos y la constitución (pp. 55-105). Editorial Universidad de Caldas.
Aguilar de Duque, L. (2012). El gobierno del poder judicial, una perspectiva comparada. Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales.
Alviar, H. (2005). La Búsqueda del Progreso en la Interpretación de la Constitución de 1991: El caso de la Intervención de la Corte en la Economía. In D. Bonilla & M. Iturralde (comps.), Hacia un Nuevo Derecho Constitucional (pp. 153-180). Editorial Universidad de los Andes
Arango, R. (2005). El concepto de derechos sociales fundamentales. Legis.
Arboleda, P.B. & Jiménez, M.C. (Eds). (2017). La garantía judicial de la Constitución: la relación entre los jueces, los derechos y la constitución. Editorial Universidad de Caldas.
Ariza, L. J. (2015). Los derechos económicos, sociales, y culturales de las personas presas y la intervención de la Corte Constitucional en el sistema penitenciario colombiano. In D. Bonilla Maldonado (ed.), Constitucionalismo del Sur Global (pp. 169-20). Siglo del Hombre editores
Bassok, O. (2012). The two counter-majoritarian difficulties. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 31(2), 333. https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/plr/vol31/iss2/5
Bickel, A. (1962). The least dangerous branch. Bobbs-Merrill.
Bickel, A. (1975). The morality of consent. Yale University Press.
Bickel, A. (1978). The Supreme Court and the idea of progress. Yale University Press.
Burt, R.A. (1995). Alex Bickel’s law school and ours. Yale Law Journal,4(7). https://digitalcommons.law. yale.edu/ylj/vol104/iss7/11
Colón Ríos, J. (2011). The counter–majoritarian difficulty and the road not taken: democratizing amendment rules. Cambridge University Press
Dahl, R. (1986). Democracy, liberty, and equality. Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. (1996). Freedom’s law: The moral reading of the American Constitution. Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. (2013). Justice for Hedgehogs. Belknap Press.
Elster, J. (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Ely, J. (1997). Democracia y desconfianza. Una teoría del control constitucional. Siglo del Hombre, Editorial Universidad de los Andes.
Esquirol, J.L. (2009). Writing the law of Latin America. George Washington International Law Review, 40, 693-732. https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/faculty_publications/325
Esquirol, J.L. (2011). The turn to legal interpretation in Latin America. American University International Law Review, 26(4), 1031-1072
Friedman, B. (1998). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part one: the road of judicial supremacy. New York University School of Law, 73(2). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.60449
Friedman, B. (2000). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part three: the lesson of lochner. New York University School of Law, 76. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.242233
Friedman, B. (2000). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part four: law’s policies. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 148(4). https://doi.org/10.2307/3312839
Friedman, B. (2002). The birth of an academic obsession: the history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part five. Yale Law Journal, 112 (2), 153. https://doi.org/10.2307/1562239
Friedman, B. (2002). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part two: reconstruction political Court. The Georgetown Law Journal, 91(1). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.312023
Friedman, B. (2004). Mediated popular constitutionalism. Michigan Law Review, 101, 2596-2636. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol101/iss8/4
Friedman, B. (2004). The importance of being positive: the nature and function of judicial review. University of Cincinnati Law Review, 72,1257.
Friedman, B. (2005). The policies of judicial review. Texas Law Review, 84,257. https://ssrn.com/abstract=877328
García Villegas, M. & Ceballos Bedoya, M.A. (Eds.).(2016). Justicia, democracia y sociedad, diez años de investigación en Dejusticia. Dejusticia
García, L. F. (2017). Justicia y Democracia: algunas reflexiones y desafíos. Editorial Universidad del Rosario.
Gargarella, R. (2006). Should deliberative democracy defend the judicial enforcement of social rights?. In S. Besson, J.L. Marti & V. Seller (Eds.), Deliberative democracy and its discontents (pp. 232-252). Ashgate.
Gómez Pinto, L.R. (2012). El juez de las políticas públicas. Bogotá: Editorial Universidad Javeriana, Grupo Editorial Ibáñez.
Heise, M. (2000). Preliminary thoughts on the virtues of passive dialogue. Akron Law Review, 34(1). https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol34/iss1/3
Horwitz, M.J. (1998). The Warren Court and the pursuit of justice. Hill and Wang. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol50/iss1/4
Hwang, S. P. (2003). The counter-majoritarian difficulty revisited-an examination of Bickel’s theory of judicial review from Dworkin’s Perspective. EURAMERICA–Institute of European and American Sudies, Academia Sinica, 33(4), 685-709.
Kennedy, D. (1980). Toward an historical understanding of legal consciousness: The case of classical legal thought in America, 1850-1940. Research in Law and Sociology, 3, 3-24
Kennedy, D. (2008). A left phenomenological alternative to the Hart/Kelsen theory of legal interpretation. In G. Vattimo & S. Zabala (serie Eds.) Legal reasoning:collected Essays (pp. 153-174). Davies Group Publishers.
Kronman, A. (1985). Alexander Bickel’s philosophy of prudence. The Yale Law Journal, 94(7),1567-1616https://doi.org/10.2307/796212
Lemaitre, J. (2005). Los derechos de los homosexuales y la Corte Constitucional: (casi) una narrativa de progreso. In D. Bonilla & M. Iturralde(Eds.), Hacia un nuevo derecho Constitucional (181-217): Editorial Universidad de los Andes
Limbach, J. (1999). The role of the federal constitutional Court. Fifty years of German basic law. American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, The John Hopkins University, 19-33.
Mendes, C. (2011). Direitos Fundamentais, Separação de Poderes e Deliberação. Editora Saraiva.
Orduz, N. (Ed). (2018). La Corte Ambiental, expresiones ciudadanas sobre los avances constitucionales. Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
Peretti, T. (1999). In defense of a Political Court. Princeton University Press.
Pogge, T. (2005). La pobreza en el mundo y los derechos humanos. Paidós.
Posner, R. (2010). How Judges think. Harvard University Press.
Rehnquist, W. (2002). The Supreme Court. Vintage Books.
Restrepo, E. (2003). Reforma constitucional y progreso social: la ‘Constitucionalización de la Vida Cotidiana’. In SELA (Seminario en Latinoamérica de Teoría Constitucional y Política) Papers. Yale Law School. https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yls_sela/14
Rostow, E.V. (1952). The Democratic Character of Judicial Review. Harvard Law Review, 66(2), 193. https://doi.org/10.2307/1336837
Ruling C-577/11.(2011, 26 July.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, J.R.).
Ruling T-025/04.(2004, 24 Apr.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, J.R).
Ruling T-077/13. (2003, 14 Feb.)Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Alexei Julio Estrada, J.R.).
Ruling T-153/98. (1998, 28 Apr.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz, J.R.).
Ruling T-406/92. (1992, 17 Jun.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Ciro Angarita Barón, J.R.).
Rush, M. (2010, June). Constitutional Dialogues and the Myth of Democratic Debilitation: Defusing the Counter-majoritarian Tension? [conference]. Annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Concordia University, Montreal, PQ, Canada.
Scheppele, K.L. (2003). The agendas of comparative Constitutionalism. Law and Courts. Newsletter of the Law and Courts Section of the American political Science Association, 1(2).
Swindler, W. & Hanson, A. B. (1968). The Warren Court 10 Wm. & Mary Law Review, (263).
Valencia Villa, H. (2010). Cartas de batalla. Editorial Panamericana.
Waldron, J. (2009). Judges as moral reasoners. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mon035.
Waldron, J. (2006). The core of the case against judicial review.Yale Law Journal, 115(6), 1346-1486.
Wen-Cheng, C. (2012). A core case for judicial review: striking a dynamic balance between constitutionalism and democracy [conference]. Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association.
Whitman, M. (2012). Brown v. Board of Education. Markus Wiener Publishers Princeton.
Agudelo, C.A. (2017). La tensión entre la democracia y los jueces. In M.C. Jiménez & P.B. Arboleda (Eds.), La garantía judicial de la Constitución: la relación entre los jueces, los derechos y la constitución (pp. 55-105). Editorial Universidad de Caldas.
Aguilar de Duque, L. (2012). El gobierno del poder judicial, una perspectiva comparada. Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales.
Alviar, H. (2005). La Búsqueda del Progreso en la Interpretación de la Constitución de 1991: El caso de la Intervención de la Corte en la Economía. In D. Bonilla & M. Iturralde (comps.), Hacia un Nuevo Derecho Constitucional (pp. 153-180). Editorial Universidad de los Andes
Arango, R. (2005). El concepto de derechos sociales fundamentales. Legis.
Arboleda, P.B. & Jiménez, M.C. (Eds). (2017). La garantía judicial de la Constitución: la relación entre los jueces, los derechos y la constitución. Editorial Universidad de Caldas.
Ariza, L. J. (2015). Los derechos económicos, sociales, y culturales de las personas presas y la intervención de la Corte Constitucional en el sistema penitenciario colombiano. In D. Bonilla Maldonado (ed.), Constitucionalismo del Sur Global (pp. 169-20). Siglo del Hombre editores
Bassok, O. (2012). The two counter-majoritarian difficulties. Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 31(2), 333. https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/plr/vol31/iss2/5
Bickel, A. (1962). The least dangerous branch. Bobbs-Merrill.
Bickel, A. (1975). The morality of consent. Yale University Press.
Bickel, A. (1978). The Supreme Court and the idea of progress. Yale University Press.
Burt, R.A. (1995). Alex Bickel’s law school and ours. Yale Law Journal,4(7). https://digitalcommons.law. yale.edu/ylj/vol104/iss7/11
Colón Ríos, J. (2011). The counter–majoritarian difficulty and the road not taken: democratizing amendment rules. Cambridge University Press
Dahl, R. (1986). Democracy, liberty, and equality. Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. (1996). Freedom’s law: The moral reading of the American Constitution. Oxford University Press.
Dworkin, R. (2013). Justice for Hedgehogs. Belknap Press.
Elster, J. (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Ely, J. (1997). Democracia y desconfianza. Una teoría del control constitucional. Siglo del Hombre, Editorial Universidad de los Andes.
Esquirol, J.L. (2009). Writing the law of Latin America. George Washington International Law Review, 40, 693-732. https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/faculty_publications/325
Esquirol, J.L. (2011). The turn to legal interpretation in Latin America. American University International Law Review, 26(4), 1031-1072
Friedman, B. (1998). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part one: the road of judicial supremacy. New York University School of Law, 73(2). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.60449
Friedman, B. (2000). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part three: the lesson of lochner. New York University School of Law, 76. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.242233
Friedman, B. (2000). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part four: law’s policies. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 148(4). https://doi.org/10.2307/3312839
Friedman, B. (2002). The birth of an academic obsession: the history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part five. Yale Law Journal, 112 (2), 153. https://doi.org/10.2307/1562239
Friedman, B. (2002). The history of the counter-majoritarian difficulty, part two: reconstruction political Court. The Georgetown Law Journal, 91(1). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.312023
Friedman, B. (2004). Mediated popular constitutionalism. Michigan Law Review, 101, 2596-2636. https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol101/iss8/4
Friedman, B. (2004). The importance of being positive: the nature and function of judicial review. University of Cincinnati Law Review, 72,1257.
Friedman, B. (2005). The policies of judicial review. Texas Law Review, 84,257. https://ssrn.com/abstract=877328
García Villegas, M. & Ceballos Bedoya, M.A. (Eds.).(2016). Justicia, democracia y sociedad, diez años de investigación en Dejusticia. Dejusticia
García, L. F. (2017). Justicia y Democracia: algunas reflexiones y desafíos. Editorial Universidad del Rosario.
Gargarella, R. (2006). Should deliberative democracy defend the judicial enforcement of social rights?. In S. Besson, J.L. Marti & V. Seller (Eds.), Deliberative democracy and its discontents (pp. 232-252). Ashgate.
Gómez Pinto, L.R. (2012). El juez de las políticas públicas. Bogotá: Editorial Universidad Javeriana, Grupo Editorial Ibáñez.
Heise, M. (2000). Preliminary thoughts on the virtues of passive dialogue. Akron Law Review, 34(1). https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol34/iss1/3
Horwitz, M.J. (1998). The Warren Court and the pursuit of justice. Hill and Wang. https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol50/iss1/4
Hwang, S. P. (2003). The counter-majoritarian difficulty revisited-an examination of Bickel’s theory of judicial review from Dworkin’s Perspective. EURAMERICA–Institute of European and American Sudies, Academia Sinica, 33(4), 685-709.
Kennedy, D. (1980). Toward an historical understanding of legal consciousness: The case of classical legal thought in America, 1850-1940. Research in Law and Sociology, 3, 3-24
Kennedy, D. (2008). A left phenomenological alternative to the Hart/Kelsen theory of legal interpretation. In G. Vattimo & S. Zabala (serie Eds.) Legal reasoning:collected Essays (pp. 153-174). Davies Group Publishers.
Kronman, A. (1985). Alexander Bickel’s philosophy of prudence. The Yale Law Journal, 94(7),1567-1616https://doi.org/10.2307/796212
Lemaitre, J. (2005). Los derechos de los homosexuales y la Corte Constitucional: (casi) una narrativa de progreso. In D. Bonilla & M. Iturralde(Eds.), Hacia un nuevo derecho Constitucional (181-217): Editorial Universidad de los Andes
Limbach, J. (1999). The role of the federal constitutional Court. Fifty years of German basic law. American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, The John Hopkins University, 19-33.
Mendes, C. (2011). Direitos Fundamentais, Separação de Poderes e Deliberação. Editora Saraiva.
Orduz, N. (Ed). (2018). La Corte Ambiental, expresiones ciudadanas sobre los avances constitucionales. Heinrich Böll Stiftung.
Peretti, T. (1999). In defense of a Political Court. Princeton University Press.
Pogge, T. (2005). La pobreza en el mundo y los derechos humanos. Paidós.
Posner, R. (2010). How Judges think. Harvard University Press.
Rehnquist, W. (2002). The Supreme Court. Vintage Books.
Restrepo, E. (2003). Reforma constitucional y progreso social: la ‘Constitucionalización de la Vida Cotidiana’. In SELA (Seminario en Latinoamérica de Teoría Constitucional y Política) Papers. Yale Law School. https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yls_sela/14
Rostow, E.V. (1952). The Democratic Character of Judicial Review. Harvard Law Review, 66(2), 193. https://doi.org/10.2307/1336837
Ruling C-577/11.(2011, 26 July.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, J.R.).
Ruling T-025/04.(2004, 24 Apr.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, J.R).
Ruling T-077/13. (2003, 14 Feb.)Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Alexei Julio Estrada, J.R.).
Ruling T-153/98. (1998, 28 Apr.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz, J.R.).
Ruling T-406/92. (1992, 17 Jun.). Constitutional Court of Colombia. (Ciro Angarita Barón, J.R.).
Rush, M. (2010, June). Constitutional Dialogues and the Myth of Democratic Debilitation: Defusing the Counter-majoritarian Tension? [conference]. Annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association, Concordia University, Montreal, PQ, Canada.
Scheppele, K.L. (2003). The agendas of comparative Constitutionalism. Law and Courts. Newsletter of the Law and Courts Section of the American political Science Association, 1(2).
Swindler, W. & Hanson, A. B. (1968). The Warren Court 10 Wm. & Mary Law Review, (263).
Valencia Villa, H. (2010). Cartas de batalla. Editorial Panamericana.
Waldron, J. (2009). Judges as moral reasoners. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 7(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mon035.
Waldron, J. (2006). The core of the case against judicial review.Yale Law Journal, 115(6), 1346-1486.
Wen-Cheng, C. (2012). A core case for judicial review: striking a dynamic balance between constitutionalism and democracy [conference]. Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association.
Whitman, M. (2012). Brown v. Board of Education. Markus Wiener Publishers Princeton.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
