Keywords
Civil Rights
Judgment T-1306 2001
process (Law)
malicious prosecuting
Evident procedural excess
writ
fundamental rights
regulatory system
inquisitorial system tests
How to Cite
Abstract
Eleven years have passed since the Constitutional Court of Colombia
began to evident procedural excess (Case T-1306, 2001).In this figure, the work presented here argues that there are two variants, one of which is directly related to the evidentiary issue. In this sense, i.e., when evident
procedural excess is preached as an error of the trial judge related to the
topic of evidence, and more accurately when reviewing writ he is forced
to practice a certain number of them it is hard not to conclude that with
regard to evident procedural excess we are taking over guardianship to
a form of last resort in terms of proof, and not only for the protection of
fundamental rights. Moreover, it can be argued that the Constitutional
Court, under the idea that the judge has a duty to pursue the truth, and
above all find it, he ventures into the relevant facts of each case which
involves evident procedural excess or, at least, suggests precisely the
way forward for the trial judge to give the fundamental right to a party.
However, It be must be said that this incursion by the constitutional judge in matters of the ordinary headquarters, is due to, in part, and within the strict limits of the figure discussed here, the fact that in Colombia on matter of evidence we share two systems : the inquisitorial and regulatory system; equally, to the way some rules of procedural law (especially related to - the duty of judges to decree evidence) are expressed, but above all, to an understanding of what the process itself means in relation to the protection of fundamental rights and the prevalence of substantive law.
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.