The sexual and reproductive rights agenda represents one of the most promising and threatened fields in the fight for the full emancipation of women and against the discrimination of the LGBTI. The research proposal inquires the role of the internet of things’, in particular of the digital technology and the web app, in guaranteeing and exercising sexual and reproductive rights, with particular emphasis on the situation of women (including, of course, lesbians and trans). The research aims to map the kinds of tools that have been proposed to guarantee those rights (e.g., about sexual education or apps that can provide some help in cases of sexual violence), and then it analyses its uses and the gender and sexual representations, along with their constitutional challenges.
The 20 years of the Rome Statute make it possible to reflect on the influence it has had on Chilean judicial practice in the investigation, prosecution and punishment of crimes against international law.
Although the Rome Statute, by express provision is not applicable for cases that occurred prior to its validity, and the Chilean ratification only took place in 2009, this instrument has had a great influence on national doctrine and jurisprudence, especially for the Supreme Court, when accounting for the concepts of the general and special part of International Criminal Law.
Coinciding with the ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case “Almonacid Arellano v. Chile”, the Rome Statute has begun to emerge as an instrument of great importance for various decisions of the Chilean courts. In this way, we will review some judgments and jurisprudential lines that, under their influence, have allowed us to deal with crimes against humanity in a better way.
This work critically reviews the procedure established by Statute N 20.609 to solve claims on arbitrary discrimination, in the light of the material parameters that effective judicial protection right entails, specially regarding the practical outcomes of judicial activity.
Thus, we have concretely examined the process, through an extense judicial analysis mainly focused in lower courts opinions, aiming to ascertain the effectiveness of this action, the manner arbitrary discrimination claims are judged, the context in which the legal conflict takes place and/or the impingement of rights, as well as the using of the available legal means to solve the problem.
With this work we aim to assess the virtues and deffects of such action and especially the legal limitations that bind the judge when properly solving a discrimination case.
The importance of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Costa Rica in the resolution of the main controversies that affect the country, from the presidential re-election to the debate on equal marriage, reveals a tendency towards the judicialization of politics. This phenomenon has taken on a new dimension by integrating a new actor into the system: the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. If, until a few years ago, the constitutional judge was considered the ultimate referee of political and constitutional conflicts, the internationalization of constitutional law has meant that more and more disputes are decided on the inter-American scale. This article will look through three examples – the case of IVF, therapeutic abortion and equal marriage – in order to analyze this phenomenon and its impact on the Costa Rican constitutional model.
The tension between democracy -as self-government- and human rights -as demands for limits on government- still causes insomnia to constitutionalists. That “dilemma” is particularly clear when judicial review and the entrenchment of rights in rigid constitutions are discussed. In previous papers, I have argued that (i) formal constitutions are justified exclusively if their rigidity derives from the best democratic procedure available –which also means it should be relatively easy to achieve- and (ii) judicial review contributes the perspective of the case but it is only acceptable if democratic principle and the whole institutional design are seriously considered by judges. Anyway, said grounds are necessary but not sufficient to defeat the counter-majoritarian difficulty. Decisions specifying rights are indeed constitutional, therefore, they should be also defined under an intense democratic procedure. I hereby intend to propose alternatives involving citizens in said decisions.