Constitutional Dismemberment in Colombia

This paper seeks to address the case of constitutional dismemberment in Colombia, through the review of some cases of constitutional amendment during the constitution of 1886 and the current political constitution of 1991. To do this, it is based on a brief review of the concept of dismemberment and its consequences on the identity, rights and structure of a constitution. After, it make an analysis of the referendum, the legislative act and the constituent national assembly as reform mechanisms in the Colombian constitution, to finally expose the main dismemberments generated in force of the constitution of 1886, and the case of the implementation of the process of peace during the constitution of 1991, as a paradigmatic case of disintegration and transitional constitutionalism. It will be concluded about the need for a deliberative activity that offers democratic control to constitutional amendment.

Constitutional amendment and Post-conflict. The Colombian case.

The present work includes the study of some constitutional amendments to the 1991 constitution, in political and electoral matters. Emphasis is placed on Legislative Act 03 of 2017 “through which the political reinstatement component of the final agreement for the termination of the conflict and the construction of a stable and lasting peace…” In this way, the study will begin through the analysis of legislative acts 01 of 2003 and 2009, evidencing that these reforms did not achieve the radical transformation demanded by the Colombian political system. Subsequently, the legal context of the peace process will be reviewed (Agreements of Havana, Cuba, between the Santos Government and the demobilized guerrilla group of the FARC), to finally evaluate the amendments exposed from the democratic principles and political pluralism, as foundations constitutional necessary for the generation of quality political participation in the electoral political scenario of the Colombian post-conflict.

Principles Jurisprudence: Methodology for The Judicial Interpretation of Fundamental Rights

The hermeneutical methodology jurisprudence of principles evidences the normative construction of fundamental rights, as structurally conceived norms in a “regulated and positive duality”. They are provisions of fundamental law and at the same time iusfundamental norms, constructed from the Praetorian law primarily, and in contemporary times by the judicial decisions of the German Federal Constitutional Court, since there is historical evidence of its construction in the Roman law of jurists, and then adopted by the Ibero-American Constitutional Courts, and in the constitutions of a large part of the Latin American states. On this occasion, we will demonstrate how the dual conception of fundamental rights is constructed from the German perspective, then its reception in Spain, and finally the generation of a decisive model for all of Latin America and for the global interpretive constitutionalism, generated in more than 28 years of jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court.