The open government represents a new paradigm for public management insofar as, unlike traditional vision, it recognizes and strengthens the various voices of society in the construction of the Public Administration. By increasing transparency, the open government allows society to have more access to information before being held solely by the bureaucratic apparatus and by political leaders, thus reducing the asymmetry of information among these actors. However, the institutionalization of channels, spaces and participative methods for the systemic organization of social participation is fundamental. Thus, access to information – enabled by transparency – and the opening of spaces and mechanisms of citizen's incidence in public policies become prominent elements. The objective of the investigation is to present, from the institutional dialogues, how the implementation of the open government practice can improve the decision-making standards of the judiciary.
This document portrays the reception of the doctrine of the National Appreciation Margin in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, also characterizes each of the thematic in which the use of the margin of appreciation proceeds or is prohibited. The preparation of the research is based on the theory of MAN developed by the ECHR, because it can considered as your production site. Under this understanding, the margin of appreciation is observed as a transregional theory of the law of human rights. The work consists of three parts, the first of which will respond to the enunciation of the theory of law of legal transplants, to explain the application of the Margin of Appreciation doctrine, in principle,foreign to the ISHR, then the Margin of Appreciation will be addressed in the ECHR and the reception of the latter will be incorporated into the the ISHR, and it will be finalized with the reflections that the investigation.
The purpose of thi paper is to contribute to the debate on the counter-majoritarian difficulty or countermajority objection attributed to the judges, trying to build a satisfactory response in democratic terms regarding the judicial review. It will be provided with an analysis of the most relevant ideas, betting on a contextual defense of the judicial review that allows us to avoid the most incisive criticisms. By means of an approximation to the application of the principle of proportionality in the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court as a
legal instrument that may be relevant in order to demonstrate a degree of rational and controllable intervention of the jurisdictional body over the work of the legislator and the Executive, it will become evident that special relationship between the main actors of the democratic game announcing that the dreaded countermayoriti difficulty is a problem absent in Ecuadorian constitutionalism.
In Argentina, a growing tendency has been noted to recognize precedent of a sort, particularly when formulated through a long course of decisions pronounced by the highest court of the land on constitutional matters. In this article, I will examine the role that precedents plays in constitutional decision-making in Argentina, one of the Latin American countries that follows most closely the United State model of judicial review, and how the Supreme court in Argentina is affected by earlier decisions on point particularly in the field of constitutional law. The basic idea is that, in order to give firmness and certainly to the constitutional values enunciated by the highest courts, it is necessary to establish a solid and compulsory body of case-law, or jurisprudence, formed by a continuous link of cases. Because like cases should be decided alike, and following established precedents helps keep the law settled, furthers the rule of law, and promotes both consistency and predictability.
A state and normative perspective of peace involves, without a doubt, the observation of the Rule of Law as a strategy and mechanism to achieve it. For this reason, the promise of overcoming a state of war, both nationally and internationally, has led to the rule of law has taken various approaches, including the Legal State and the Constitutional State. However, the links generated between the Constitutions and the international law of human rights, especially in the Latin American context, allow us to notice an initial configuration of what can be called: Conventional State of Law. In that sense, the current work will focus its efforts on establishing the budgets that allow us to understand this state model within the framework of the Latin American constitutional ius commune.