scholarly journals The Internationalization of Judicial Review in the Colombian High Courts

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 001
Author(s):  
Juan Sebastián Villamil Rodriguez

The internationalization of adjudication in the Colombian high court refers to the growing importance that the American Convention on Human Rights has gained among the judicial forums of this country, but especially to the phenomenon that occurs when national judiciaries implement and appropriate the doctrine of the control of conventionality. The Convention has claimed a high ground in the Colombian constitutional system due to the appropriation of international law by national courts decisions, and to the process of the internationalization of the law. By consistently applying the control of conventionality doctrine, courts like the State Council have reaffirmed the binding nature and the effectiveness of the decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for the Colombian legal system. In contrast to a much more regressive posture assumed by the Constitutional Court in recent decisions, the State Council, drawing on the legal contents of international law, has broadened the range of legal sources for rights interpretation in Colombia. By this action, as it will be further stated in this article, the State Council has contributed to a move away from a paradigm of a legalism based solely on the state sovereignty and national constitutionalism, towards one that endorses the pluralist structure of post-national law. Against this background, this article aims to discuss how the relationship of national judiciaries with international law is best understood as reflecting the development of a pluralist legal dynamic, sometimes referred to as jurisprudential dialogue, that involves the broadening of the normative horizon and the internationalization of the sources available for national judges in their reasoning; particularly in the cases that involve human rights violations.

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (13) ◽  
pp. 176-189
Author(s):  
Fernando Gómez Forero

El presente artículo sobre la situación actual de las cárce- les, se ocupa específicamente de lo relacionado con el ha- cinamiento y las posibles alternativas para su superación. El objetivo es hacer un análisis crítico sobre el verdadero nivel de hacinamiento en que se encuentran ahora los cen- tros penitenciarios, y la relación que existe con la protec- ción de los derechos humanos por parte del Estado, como un imperativo que requiere de su pleno cumplimiento. Esta problemática es una situación permanente, recurren- te y con tendencia a profundizarse, lo que ha ocasiona- do una crisis en materia del derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, que ha supuesto necesariamente una responsabilidad del Estado, producto sin duda del estado de cosas inconstitucional que fue establecido por la Corte Constitucional a través de la sentencia T-153 de 1998. Las conclusiones reflejan en su conjunto el alto nivel de inefi- ciencia con la que se ha actuado por parte del ejecutivo y el legislativo en la solución de la crisis de hacinamiento car- celario y la necesidad de emprender acciones afirmativas, libres del discurso propositivo, que no hace otra cosa que simplificar el problema pero no solucionarlo.This article, about the current situation of prisons, spe- cifically related to prison overcrowding and alternatives to overcome them, are part of the goal to make a critical analysis of the true level of overcrowding in which are now centers prisons and the relationship with the protec- tion of Human Rights by the State as an imperative that requires full compliance, this is a permanent, recurrent and tend to deepen situation, which has caused a crisis in the International Law of Human Rights (HR), which has necessarily meant a state liability in this situation, as a re- sult without question of “Unconstitutional Things in the State” established by the Constitutional Court through the final desition T-153 of 1998. The closures as a whole reflect of the high level of inefficiency with which action has been taken by the Executive and legislative branches in the solution of the overcrowding crisis in prisons and the need to undertake purposeful assertive speech affir- mative action, which does nothing to simplify the problem but not in solving it. 


2010 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 507-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
DANIEL JOYCE

AbstractThis article considers the relationship of international law and the media through the prism of human rights. In the first section the international regulation of the media is examined and visions of good, bad, and new media emerge. In the second section, the enquiry is reversed and the article explores the ways in which the media is shaping international legal forms and processes in the field of human rights. This is termed the ‘mediatization of international law’. Yet despite hopes for new media and the Internet to transform international law, the theoretical work of Jodi Dean warns of the danger to democracy of commodification through the spread of ‘communicative capitalism’.


2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Umbu Rauta ◽  
Ninon Melatyugra

Tulisan ini ingin menjawab dua isu utama mengenai hubungan hukum internasional dan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi RI (MKRI). Isu pertama adalah legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai alat interpretasi dalam pengujian undang-undang, sedangkan isu kedua adalah urgensi penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MKRI. Tulisan ini merupakan penelitian hukum yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan historis dalam menjelaskan perkembangan pengujian undang-undang di Indonesia sekaligus menemukan legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional oleh MK RI. Kesimpulan dari tulisan ini menegaskan bahwa hukum internasional memiliki sumbangsih yang penting dalam perannya sebagai alat interpretasi dalam proses pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, khususnya terkait hak asasi manusia. Justifikasi keabsahan praktik penggunaan hukum internasional tersebut ditarik dari tradisi ketatanegaraan yang secara implisit dikehendaki UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Manfaat positif yang diberikan hukum internasional nyatanya harus disertai juga dengan penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK RI supaya hukum internasional dapat digunakan secara tepat. Pembahasan dalam tulisan ini dibagi ke dalam empat sub bahasan inti yakni, pengujian undang-undang, penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang oleh MK, legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang, pentingnya penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK.This article intentionally answers two principal issues regarding the relationship between international law and judicial review by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The first issue is the legitimacy of international use as an interpretative tool in judicial review. The second issue talks about the necessity of urgent international law mastery by the Constitutional Court’s judges. This legal research utilizes both a conceptual approach and a historical approach to explain the development of judicial review in Indonesia, and to find legitimacy of international law by the Constitutional Court. The analysis in this article affirms that international law positively contributes as an interpretative tool in judicial review by the Constitutional Court, particularly pertaining to human rights. A justification of a legitimate international law use is withdrawn from constitutional tradition which is implicitly desired by the Indonesian Constitution (UUD NRI 1945). Since international law has provided better insights into norms, a mastery of international law should be encouraged. There are four main discussions in this article: judicial review, application of international law in judicial review process, legitimacy of international law application in judicial review, and the importance of international law mastering by Constitutional Court judges.


2020 ◽  
pp. 159-181
Author(s):  
Lea Raible

The very term ‘extraterritoriality’ implies that territory is significant. So far, however, my argument focuses on jurisdiction rather than territory. This chapter adds clarifications in this area. It examines the relationship of jurisdiction in international human rights law, whether understood as political power or not, and title to territory in international law. To this end, I start by looking at what international law has to say about jurisdiction as understood in international human rights law, and territory, respectively. The conclusion of the survey is that the two concepts serve different normative purposes, are underpinned by different values, and that they are thus not the same. Accordingly, an account of their relationship should be approached with conceptual care.


2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-52
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Cataldi

In judgment No. 238 of 22 October 2014, the Italian Constitutional Court ruled on the legitimacy of certain norms of the Italian legal order which relate to the implementation of the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) judgment in theJurisdictional Immunities of the State case. In this case the Court found that customary international law concerning State immunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity could not enter the Italian legal order, as it was incompatible with the basic principles of the Italian Constitution. Judgment No. 238/2014 thus reveals a key connection between domestic fundamental values and internationally recognized values. If this connection exists, national courts should decline to give effect to an international decision if it contravenes a fundamental obligation under national as well as international law. Thus, domestic courts may play the role of defenders of the international rule of law from international law itself. According to international law, as well as Italian law, there is no doubt that enforcement of an ICJ decision is mandatory for the State to which the decision is directed. In the case under review, however, the requirement to implement the ruling of the ICJ was set aside in order to defer to the requirement to respect the fundamental values of the Italian legal system, in accordance with the theory of “counter-limits” as developed by the Constitutional Court. This conclusion appears also consistent with the German order, which renders quite weak any possible reaction, or protest, by that State.


2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oreste Pollicino

It is never too late. In two decisions handed down at the end of October 2007, the Italian Constitutional Court seems finally to have begun to take seriously one of the Italian Constitution's fundamental principles: the openness to international law which is embodied in Articles 10, 11 and – the provision chosen by the Constitutional Court in the judgments being examined – 117, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, which was added by the constitutional revision of 2001. In particular, the two decisions focus on the relationship between the Italian constitutional legal order and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document