El refuerzo del diálogo entre tribunales y la triple prejudicialidad en la protección de los derechos fundamentales: en torno al Protocolo n.º 16 al Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos
The adoption of the Protocols 15 and 16 to the ECHR has completed a new process of reflection on the shortcomings and transformations that the protection system of the European Convention on Human Rights will face in the coming decades. The new protocol, named the «protocol of dialogue», incorporate...
Gorde:
| Egile nagusia: | |
|---|---|
| Formatua: | Artikulua |
| Hizkuntza: | Gaztelania |
| Argitaratua: |
2018
|
| Gaiak: | |
| Sarrera elektronikoa: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6800411 |
| Baliabidea: | Teoría y realidad constitucional, ISSN 1139-5583, Nº 42, 2018 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos), pags. 453-482 |
| Etiketak: |
Etiketa erantsi
Etiketarik gabe: Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen
|
| Laburpena: |
The adoption of the Protocols 15 and 16 to the ECHR has completed a new process of reflection on the shortcomings and transformations that the protection system of the European Convention on Human Rights will face in the coming decades. The new protocol, named the «protocol of dialogue», incorporates a novel «incidental procedure of dialogue » in the framework of the conventionality control, a procedure in addition to preliminary questions which already exist under European Union law (EU) and in the framework of constitutional control. This article aims to address particular reference to the increasing complexity that Conventional preliminary procedure will bring in those systems in which there are a preliminary question of constitutionality and the preliminary reference procedure on the interpretation of EU law. The preliminary reference procedure enacted by Protocol 16 can become a valuable tool in the process of cooperation and coherence propulsion of jurisprudential circuit, built from the circularity of conforming interpretations of the Constitutional Court, Court of Justice of the EU and ECtHR. The new preliminary question will not bring a reduction in the autonomy of national jurisdiction, but should be seen as a further guarantee of the triple protection of rights that overlap and whose essential rule is «the best standard of protection» from the starting point of a discursive argument founded on the best solution. |
|---|