Social Protests as Constitutional Interpretation

This research deals with a parcel of the protests that have been taking place over the last few years, particularly since 2010: those protests in which the protesters, instead of rebelling against the legitimacy of the system, have preferred to accept the regimes remaining in place and consequently have manifested their discontent via playing by the constitutional rules of the game. Although governmental responses have varied in degree, in the end they have all focused on limiting the right of the people to publicly assemble and express their views. As this work contends, when governments restrict protests (sometimes violently doing so) they ignore the fact that protests involve the exercise of rights and arbitrarily restrict the voices that shape constitutional understanding. By resorting to a mixture of theoretical and comparative approaches, this thesis argues that protests which manifest their acceptance of the regimes remaining in place have, when dealing with matters a lot of people care a lot, the potential of becoming popular interpretations of constitutions. The thesis is composed of three main argumentative lines. The first argumentative line rests on the sociology of social movements and from there proposes some conceptual definitions as to what playing by the rules means to social protests. The second argumentative line builds on a comparative analysis to show what constitutional rights are (usually) involved in protecting social protests and what other rights should be considered in enhancing that protection. Finally, the third argumentative line explains that accepting the regimes remaining in place poses politico-constitutional duties on both sides, that of the citizens and that of institutions. Whereas citizens find themselves committed to submitting their popular understandings to institutions, institutions are bound to open their venues and dialogue with (and not merely to be, depending on circumstances, influenced by) these popular contentions

NORMAS DE CONSTITUCIÓN, NORMAS DE LEY: UNA RESPUESTA IMPROBABLE A LA LUZ DEL CASO CHILENO

One of the cross-cutting debates generated by the proposal for a new Constitution offered by the Constitutional Convention — later rejected by the people —, was the question of which matters should be included in a Constitution and which, on the other hand, should be left to the law (or other normative sources). The purpose of this paper is to sort out the arguments upon which these objections were formulated. They are divided into four reasons. The first stems from a certain expectation or conception about the function of constitutions. The second rests on a view of how constitutions might encourage or undermine democracy by transferring decision-making powers to non-representative institutions such as the judiciary. The third claims a breach of what would be a globally accumulated constitutional experience. The fourth, and last, is formulated from a certain social and/or national culture that must be respected. Each of these criteria will be subjected to scrutiny with reasons that, just as the criteria themselves, are echoed in the specialized literature.Uno de los debates transversales que generó la propuesta de nueva Constitución ofrecida por la Convención Constitucional — rechazada, luego, por el pueblo — fue el relativo a las materias que deberían incluirse en una Constitución y cuáles, en cambio, dejadas a la ley (u otras fuentes normativas). Este trabajo tiene por objetivo ordenar los argumentos a partir de los que se formulaban esas objeciones. Se dividen en cuatro razones. La primera de ellas arranca de una cierta expectativa o concepción respecto de la función de las constituciones. La segunda reposa en una visión sobre la forma en que las constituciones podrían alentar o menoscabar la democracia al transferir poderes de decisión a instituciones no representativas. La tercera reclama una supuesta infracción a la experiencia constitucional acumulada globalmente. La cuarta, y última, se formula desde una cierta cultura social y/o nacional que debe respetarse. Cada uno de esos criterios será sometido a escrutinio con razones que, desde luego — así como los mismos criterios —, encuentran eco en la literatura especializada

El Informe de Chile ante el Comité de Derechos Económicos Sociales y Culturales: El Papel del Derecho

c) Comentarios sobre Informes, recomendaciones y otros desarrollos en derechos humano

El Informe de Chile ante el Comité de Derechos Económicos Sociales y Culturales: El Papel del Derecho

c) Comentarios sobre Informes, recomendaciones y otros desarrollos en derechos humano

Access to medical treatment for people living with HIV/AIDS: success without victory in Chile

Apresenta algumas ideias sobre o impacto que as decisões judiciais podem ter sobre o sistema político. Demonstra como esse impacto depende mais da sensibilidade do sistema político para responder à situação desesperadora em que muitos de seus cidadãos se encontram, e do medo da pressão política, do que das possibilidades abertas por decisões judiciais importantes

Acesso a tratamento médico para pessoas vivendo com HIV/AIDS: êxitos sem vitória no Chile

Publicado em português, espanhol e inglês.Título em espanhol: Acceso a tratamiento médico para personas viviendo con VIH/SIDA: éxitos sin victoria en Chile. -- Título em inglês: Access to medical treatment for people living with HIV/AIDS: success without victory in Chile.Apresenta algumas idéias relativas ao impacto que as decisões judiciais causam no sistema político. Diferentemente do que se costuma destacar do trabalho dos tribunais em matéria de direitos sociais, quando se põem em relevo os padrões e formas em que os tribunais os concebem para satisfazer as demandas de justiciabilidade desses direitos, os autores se centram no caso chileno – mostram como o litígio estratégico pode causar, apesar de resultados judiciais adversos, um impacto positivo na satisfação dos direitos sociais. Esse impacto depende mais da sensatez do sistema político para levar em conta a situação desesperada em que se encontram muitos de seus cidadãos, ou o temor da pressão política, do que das possibilidades que oferecem as grandes declarações provenientes dos tribunais

El Tribunal Constitucional Chileno y la doctrina de reformas constitucionales inconstitucionales: una doctrina inconveniente

Este trabajo aborda las consecuencias de la decisión del Tribunal Constitucional chileno en los casos denominados Rentas Vitalicias, desde el punto de vista de la doctrina de las reformas constitucionales inconstitucionales. En primer término, examina el estado de la cuestión en la dogmática nacional, con aportes del derecho comparado. En seguida, analiza el precedente del Tribunal Constitucional en el caso Retiro 2 en donde se decidió, por primera vez en Chile, la declaración de inconstitucionalidad de una reforma constitucional. En segundo lugar, el trabajo reconstruye el argumento del Tribunal en los Rentas Vitalicias, enfocándose en los argumentos generales y en aquellos relativos a la competencia para declarar la inaplicabilidad de un precepto legal. A partir de ello, se argumenta que la decisión del tribunal impacta en la comprensión del sistema de fuentes formales chileno, en las competencias del mismo Tribunal Constitucional, en la separación de funciones en materia de reformas constitucionales y respecto del Estado de Derecho en general