Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
The death of democracy and the failure of liberalism are proclaimed around the world. The concern that shortcuts such as populism and technocracy continue to be taken, and the comparably lesser number of proactive scholarly writings, explain the appearance of Democracy without Shortcuts. Contrary to...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8990922 |
| Source: | Revista Derecho del Estado, ISSN 0122-9893, Nº. 55, 2023 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Edición Especial), pags. 207-239 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| id |
dialnet-ar-18-ART0001606454
|
|---|---|
| record_format |
dialnet
|
| institution |
Dialnet
|
| collection |
Dialnet AR
|
| source |
Revista Derecho del Estado, ISSN 0122-9893, Nº. 55, 2023 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Edición Especial), pags. 207-239
|
| language |
Spanish
|
| topic |
Democracy
self-government participation deliberative democracy judicial review Democracia auto-gobierno participación democracia deliberativa control judicial de constitucionalidad |
| spellingShingle |
Democracy
self-government participation deliberative democracy judicial review Democracia auto-gobierno participación democracia deliberativa control judicial de constitucionalidad García Jaramillo, Leonardo Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina |
| description |
The death of democracy and the failure of liberalism are proclaimed around the world. The concern that shortcuts such as populism and technocracy continue to be taken, and the comparably lesser number of proactive scholarly writings, explain the appearance of Democracy without Shortcuts. Contrary to the purely epistemic version of deliberative democracy, Cristina Lafont defends a participatory version in which “the experts” do not reject citizens from public deliberation. The participatory version is articulated with judicial review democratic legitimacy. Analyzing this contribution is the objective of the article: What perspective does Lafont present and what arguments does it put forward that help us to understand and justifies in our context this multifaceted problem? This institution is an additional channel with a significant capacity to empower social movements –especially those “discrete and insular”, worse placed in the representative process– to point out a problem, explain where an injustice lies or contribute to construct a basic right. This capacity is subject, in addition to Lafont’s approach (the courts do not choose cases but among those submitted for review and with arguments by the parties and lower judges), to an incremental judicial philosophy and to deliberative judicial practices.
|
| format |
Article
|
| author |
García Jaramillo, Leonardo
|
| author_facet |
García Jaramillo, Leonardo
|
| author_sort |
García Jaramillo, Leonardo
|
| title |
Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
|
| title_short |
Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
|
| title_full |
Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
|
| title_fullStr |
Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
|
| title_full_unstemmed |
Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América Latina
|
| title_sort |
control judicial y contención al atajo populista en américa latina
|
| publishDate |
2023
|
| url |
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8990922
|
| _version_ |
1770000649657778176
|
| spelling |
dialnet-ar-18-ART00016064542023-06-24Control judicial y contención al atajo populista en América LatinaGarcía Jaramillo, LeonardoDemocracyself-governmentparticipationdeliberative democracyjudicial reviewDemocraciaauto-gobiernoparticipacióndemocracia deliberativacontrol judicial de constitucionalidadThe death of democracy and the failure of liberalism are proclaimed around the world. The concern that shortcuts such as populism and technocracy continue to be taken, and the comparably lesser number of proactive scholarly writings, explain the appearance of Democracy without Shortcuts. Contrary to the purely epistemic version of deliberative democracy, Cristina Lafont defends a participatory version in which “the experts” do not reject citizens from public deliberation. The participatory version is articulated with judicial review democratic legitimacy. Analyzing this contribution is the objective of the article: What perspective does Lafont present and what arguments does it put forward that help us to understand and justifies in our context this multifaceted problem? This institution is an additional channel with a significant capacity to empower social movements –especially those “discrete and insular”, worse placed in the representative process– to point out a problem, explain where an injustice lies or contribute to construct a basic right. This capacity is subject, in addition to Lafont’s approach (the courts do not choose cases but among those submitted for review and with arguments by the parties and lower judges), to an incremental judicial philosophy and to deliberative judicial practices.La muerte de la democracia y el fracaso del liberalismo se proclaman por el mundo. La preocupación de que se sigan tomando atajos, como el populismo y la tecnocracia, y la escasa cantidad de trabajos propositivos, explican la aparición de Democracia sin atajos. En contra de la versión puramente epistémica de la democracia deliberativa, Cristina Lafont defiende una versión participativa donde el ciudadano no queda desplazado de la deliberación por “los que saben”, y articula esta versión con la legitimidad democrática del control judicial de constitucionalidad. Analizar dicho aporte es el objetivo del artículo: ¿qué perspectiva adopta y qué argumentos esgrime que nos ayudan a fundamentar mejor, y por tanto a defender, el control judicial en el contexto de países latinoamericanos que, en tanto Estados constitucionales, padecen profundas patologías democráticas? El control judicial constituye un canal adicional con una capacidad estimable para empoderar a movimientos sociales para señalar un problema y agendarlo políticamente, explicar dónde radica una injusticia o contribuir a desarrollar la interpretación de un derecho. Esta capacidad, se sustenta aquí, está condicionada, además del planteamiento de Lafont (los tribunales no escogen casos sino entre aquellos sometidos a su revisión y con argumentos de las partes y los jueces inferiores) a una filosofía judicial incrementalista y a prácticas judiciales deliberativas.2023text (article)application/pdfhttps://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8990922(Revista) ISSN 0122-9893Revista Derecho del Estado, ISSN 0122-9893, Nº. 55, 2023 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Edición Especial), pags. 207-239spaLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI
|