The "Basic Structure" of the Constitution as an Enforceable Yardstick in Comparative Constitutional Adjudication

This article deals with the elaboration and use of the concept of a basic structure of the constitution in different jurisdictions, especially from Europe and Latin America. Through this comparative analysis, it aims to prove that the yardstick employed for constitutional adjudication on amendments has a specific scope and content, and that both scope and content are mainly decided by courts. After explaining the arguments courts have employed in order to justify their role, it focuses on the different denominations of the "basic structure" in the set of the selected case studies, finally concentrating on the role of constitutional and supreme courts

Conventionality Control Between International and Constitutional Law: the Viewpoint of a Comparativist

This contribution addresses conventionality control in its double dimension, encompassing international law and constitutional law. It focuses on the comparative methodological issues when equating the Inter-American and the European systems of protection of human rights, taking into account the progressive “Europeanization” of the former’s case law. Then, it critically examines the question of judicial authority of domestic and international courts in multilevel systems, to raise a few points concerning the complex relationship between international courts and states

EUROPEAN COMPARATIVE LAW: Reasons for “Enhanced Comparison” and Role of the CJEU

This paper offers a critical reconstruction of the conceptual and comparative assessment of European Law, while putting forward two novel ideas. On the one hand, the author elaborates upon the existence of an ‘inner core’ within the European legal space which is distinctively prone to successful and methodologically sound comparison, providing a threefold justification of her reasoning. Such justification is based on the unique normative and institutional framework, on the overlap of interconnections between the coexisting legal systems and on the evolution of the methodology in European scholarship. On the other hand, the author focuses on the role of the CJEU, departing from previous studies on the use of comparative law and proposing a new approach to case selection and application of legal comparison

Global Challenges, Local Solutions: An Introduction to New Perspectives to International and Comparative Law

The paper explores how the Covid-19 pandemic emergency has challenges traditional categories of international and constitutional law from a comparative perspective

Integración europea, múltiples crisis y necesidad de nuevos enfoques: reflexiones preliminares”

This paper introduces how the multiple crises of European integration, namely Brexit, the refugee crisis, the economic crisis and the crisis of the rule of law challenge several foundations of the EU: solidarity, mutual trust and the rule of law itself. Then, it focuses in particular on the centralization derived from the financial situation of the past ten years, with respect to the rising role of the executives among domestic institutions and from a territorial perspective. These ideas bring the author to assess to what extent the failure of the European model of integration obliges to rethink traditional categories through a multidisciplinary prism

El control material de las reformas constitucionales en perspectiva comparada

This essay deals with the implications of the judicial review related to Constitutional amendments, through the selection of some representative cases. It focuses on the case-law of the legal systems chosen where Constitutional or Supreme Courts asserted being enabled to verify the effectiveness of limits against possible misuses by political actors. Those Courts used different arguments to demonstrate that the control of amendments is an unavoidable consecuence of the Constitutional supremacy and all of them are analyzed in the text.Este estudio investiga el alcance del papel de la jurisdicción constitucional relativa a las reformas, mediante el análisis de algunos casos representativos. Se centra en las decisiones tomadas en los ordenamientos seleccionados, donde los Tribunales Constitucionales —o Supremos, en su caso— han reivindicado la función de supervisores de la efectividad de los límites, frente a posibles excesos de los actores políticos. Para demostrar que el control de las reformas es un corolario imprescindible de la supremacía constitucional, estos órganos jurisdiccionales han empleado los diferentes argumentos que se analizan en el texto.This essay deals with the implications of the judicial review related to Constitutional amendments, through the selection of some representative cases. It focuses on the case-law of the legal systems chosen where Constitutional or Supreme Courts asserted being enabled to verify the effectiveness of limits against possible misuses by political actors. Those Courts used different arguments to demonstrate that the control of amendments is an unavoidable consecuence of the Constitutional supremacy and all of them are analyzed in the text