Cuando la sociedad civil habla, ¿los jueces escuchan?: análisis de las audiencias públicas ante el Tribunal Constitucional chileno y su impacto en las sentencias constitucionales
This paper analyzes a decade of public hearings convened by the Chilean Constitutional Court, seeking to determine if their conduct has impacted on the argumentation of its constitutional judgments. The question is whether its realization enriches deliberation and democratizes constitutional interpr...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2022
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8845224 |
| Source: | Revista Estudios Socio-Jurídicos, ISSN 2145-4531, Vol. 24, Nº. 1, 2022 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Arbitraje de inversión (pre-print)) |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
This paper analyzes a decade of public hearings convened by the Chilean Constitutional Court, seeking to determine if their conduct has impacted on the argumentation of its constitutional judgments. The question is whether its realization enriches deliberation and democratizes constitutional interpretation, as indicated by the theory. The theoretical treatment of the institution is exposed, with special emphasis on comparative Latin American experiences. Then the judgments that resolve cases in which hearings have been convened are analyzed, in order to identify what criteria the court uses to convene said hearings, if reference is made to them in the argumentation of the rulings, and if they are thus, with what argumentative role they are referred to. The work concludes that the information and arguments that civil society contributes in public hearings are underused in the argumentation process of judicial decisions, and that the deliberative and democratizing potential of the institution with respect to constitutionality control processes does not deploys in practice. |
|---|