In all democratic states, constitutional courts, which are traditionally empowered to invalidate or to annul unconstitutional statutes, have the role of interpreting and applying the Constitution in order to preserve its supremacy and to ensure the prevalence of fundamental rights. In this sense they were traditionally considered "negative legislators," unable to substitute the legislators or to enact legislative provisions that could not be deducted from the Constitution. During the past decade the role of constitutional courts has dramatically changed as their role is no longer limited to declaring the unconstitutionality of statutes or annulling them. Today, constitutional courts condition their decisions with the presumption of constitutionality of statutes, opting to interpret them according to or in harmony with the Constitution in order to preserve them, instead of deciding their annulment or declaring them unconstitutional. More frequently, Constitutional Courts, instead of dealing with existing legislation, assume the role of assistants or auxiliaries to the legislator, creating provisions they deduct from the Constitution when controlling the absence of legislation or legislative omissions. In some cases they act as "positive legislators," issuing temporary or provisional rules to be applied pending the enactment of legislation. This book analyzes this new role of the constitutional courts, conditioned by the principles of progressiveness and of prevalence of human rights, particularly regarding the important rediscovery of the right to equality and non-discrimination.
Derived from the renowned multi-volume International Encyclopaedia of Laws, this very useful analysis of constitutional law in Venezuela provides essential information on the country’s sources of constitutional law, its form of government, and its administrative structure. Lawyers who handle transnational matters will appreciate the clarifications of particular terminology and its application. Throughout the book, the treatment emphasizes the specific points at which constitutional law affects the interpretation of legal rules and procedure. Thorough coverage by a local expert fully describes the political system, the historical background, the role of treaties, legislation, jurisprudence, and administrative regulations. The discussion of the form and structure of government outlines its legal status, the jurisdiction and workings of the central state organs, the subdivisions of the state, its decentralized authorities, and concepts of citizenship. Special issues include the legal position of aliens, foreign relations, taxing and spending powers, emergency laws, the power of the military, and the constitutional relationship between church and state. Details are presented in such a way that readers who are unfamiliar with specific terms and concepts in varying contexts will fully grasp their meaning and significance. Its succinct yet scholarly nature, as well as the practical quality of the information it provides, make this book a valuable time-saving tool for both practising and academic jurists. Lawyers representing parties with interests in Venezuela will welcome this guide, and academics and researchers will appreciate its value in the study of comparative constitutional law.
This book examines the process of dismantling the democratic institutions and protections in Venezuela under the Hugo Chávez regime. The actions of the Chávez government have influenced similar processes and undemocratic manoeuvrings in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Honduras. Since the election of Hugo Chávez as president of Venezuela in 1998, a sinister form of nationalistic authoritarianism has arisen at the expense of long-established democratic standards. During the past decade, the 1999 Venezuelan Constitution has been systematically attacked by all branches of the Chávez government, particularly by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, which has legitimized the Chávez-ordered constitutional violations. The Chávez regime has purposely defrauded the Constitution and severely restricted representative government, all in the name of a supposedly participatory democracy controlled by a popularly supported central government. This volume illustrates how an authoritarian, nondemocratic government has been established in Venezuela.
This book examines the most recent trends in the constitutional and legal regulations in all Latin American countries regarding the amparo proceeding. It analyzes the regulations of the seventeen amparo statutes in force in Latin America, as well as the regulation on the amparo guarantee established in Article 25 of the American Convention of Human Rights.
All over the world, in all democratic States, independently of having a legal system based on the common law or on the civil law principles, the courts – special constitutional courts, supreme courts or ordinary courts – have the power to decide and declare the unconstitutionality of legislation or of other State acts when a particular statute violates the text of the Constitution or of its constitutional principles. This power of the courts is the consequence of the consolidation in contem-porary constitutionalism of three fundamental principles of law: first, the existence of a written or unwritten constitution or of a fundamental law, conceived as a superior law with clear supremacy over all other statutes; second, the “rigid” character of such constitution or fundamental law, which implies that the amendments or reforms that may be introduced can only be put into practice by means of a particular and special constituent or legislative process, preventing the ordinary legislator from doing so; and third, the establishment in that same written or unwritten and rigid constitution or fundamental law, of the judicial means for guaranteeing its supremacy, over all other state acts, including legislative acts. Accordingly, in democratic systems subjected to such principles, the courts have the power to refuse to enforce a statute when deemed to be contrary to the Constitu-tion, considering it null or void, through what is known as the diffuse system of judicial review; and in many cases, they even have the power to annul the said unconstitutional law, through what is known as the concentrated system of judicial review. The former, is the system created more than two hundred years ago by the Supreme Court of the United States, and that so deeply characterizes the North American Constitutional system. The latter system, has been adopted in consti-tutional systems in which the judicial power of judicial review has been generally assigned to the Supreme Court or to one special Constitutional Court, as is the case, for example, of many countries in Europe and in Latin America. This concentrated system of judicial review, although established in many Latin American countries since the 19th century, was only effectively developed particularly in the world after World War II following the studies of Hans Kelsen. Of course, during the past thirty years many changes have occurred in the world on these matters of Judicial Review, in particularly in Europe and specifically in the United Kingdom, where these Lectures were delivered. Nonetheless, I have decided to publish them hereto in its integrality, as they were: the written work of a law professor made as a consequence of his research for the preparation of his lectures, not pretending to be anything else, but the academic testimony of the state of the subject of judicial review in the world in 1985-1986". Allan R. Brewer–Carías.
This book on The Civil Rights Injunction for the protection of Funda-mental Rights. The Latin American «Amparo» Proceeding, is the original version of the text I wrote for the Couse of Lectures I gave, as Adjunct Professor of Law, on a Seminar on Judicial Protection of Fundamental Rights in Latin America: the Amparo Proceeding, at the Columbia Law School in New York, University of Columbia, during the years 2006-2008. The Seminar was intended to examine the most recent trends in the constitutional and legal regulations in all Latin American countries regarding the “amparo” suit, action or recourse– including the old habeas corpus writ and the new habeas data actions or recourses. By means of a comparative constitutional law approach, also with reference to the United States civil rights injunctions, the Course analyzed this Latin American institution departing from the regulation of the “amparo” guarantee established in Article 25 of the 1969 American Convention of Human Rights which entered into force in 1978 after being ratified by all Latin American States. The amparo suit or proceeding is not only an effective judicial means for the restoration of the injured constitutional rights that has been harmed, similar to the reparative or restorative civil rights injunctions in the United States, but it is also the effective judicial means for the protection of such rights and guaranties when threatened to be violated or harmed. This latter amparo suit is then similar to the preventive civil rights injunctions in the United States; “preventive” in the sense of avoiding harm; which, in this case, “seeks to prohibit some discrete act or series of acts from occurring in the future”, and is designed “to avoid future harm to a party by prohibiting or mandating certain behavior to another party”. From this point of view, thus, in a constitutional comparative law approach, the Latin American amparo action or proceeding, is a judicial remedy similar to the civil rights injunctions (restorative or preventive) in the United States". Allan R. Brewer Carías.
This book examines the process of dismantling the democratic institutions and protections in Venezuela under the Hugo Chávez regime. The actions of the Chávez government have influenced similar processes and undemocratic manoeuvrings in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Honduras. Since the election of Hugo Chávez as president of Venezuela in 1998, a sinister form of nationalistic authoritarianism has arisen at the expense of long-established democratic standards. During the past decade, the 1999 Venezuelan Constitution has been systematically attacked by all branches of the Chávez government, particularly by the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, which has legitimized the Chávez-ordered constitutional violations. The Chávez regime has purposely defrauded the Constitution and severely restricted representative government, all in the name of a supposedly participatory democracy controlled by a popularly supported central government. This volume illustrates how an authoritarian, nondemocratic government has been established in Venezuela.
This book of Professor Allan R. Brewer-Carias, is a recollection of all his contributions to the the International Academy of Comparative Law, on matters of Comparative Public Law (Comparative Constitutional Law and Comparative Administrative Law), submitted between 1966 and 2022, as General Reports to the Congresses of the Academy held in Uppsala, August 1966; Pescara, August-September 1970; Tehran, August-September 1974; Caracas, August-September 1982; in Montreal, August 1990; Bristol, July-August 1998; and Washington, July 2010; as well as all the Venezuelan National Reports on the same matters sent to the Academy for its consideration by the respective General Reporters in the International Congresses of Uppsala 1966, Budapest 1978, Caracas 1982, Brisbane 2002, Utrecht 2006, Mexico 2008, Vienna 2014 and La Asunción 2022.
This book on The Civil Rights Injunction for the protection of Funda-mental Rights. The Latin American «Amparo» Proceeding, is the original version of the text I wrote for the Couse of Lectures I gave, as Adjunct Professor of Law, on a Seminar on Judicial Protection of Fundamental Rights in Latin America: the Amparo Proceeding, at the Columbia Law School in New York, University of Columbia, during the years 2006-2008. The Seminar was intended to examine the most recent trends in the constitutional and legal regulations in all Latin American countries regarding the “amparo” suit, action or recourse– including the old habeas corpus writ and the new habeas data actions or recourses. By means of a comparative constitutional law approach, also with reference to the United States civil rights injunctions, the Course analyzed this Latin American institution departing from the regulation of the “amparo” guarantee established in Article 25 of the 1969 American Convention of Human Rights which entered into force in 1978 after being ratified by all Latin American States. The amparo suit or proceeding is not only an effective judicial means for the restoration of the injured constitutional rights that has been harmed, similar to the reparative or restorative civil rights injunctions in the United States, but it is also the effective judicial means for the protection of such rights and guaranties when threatened to be violated or harmed. This latter amparo suit is then similar to the preventive civil rights injunctions in the United States; “preventive” in the sense of avoiding harm; which, in this case, “seeks to prohibit some discrete act or series of acts from occurring in the future”, and is designed “to avoid future harm to a party by prohibiting or mandating certain behavior to another party”. From this point of view, thus, in a constitutional comparative law approach, the Latin American amparo action or proceeding, is a judicial remedy similar to the civil rights injunctions (restorative or preventive) in the United States". Allan R. Brewer Carías.
This book is a collection of all the Essays of Professor Allan R. Brewer-Carias on the Venezuelan Authoritarian Government and the Demolition of the Rule of Law, written during the past fourteen years (1999-2014), in which he has analyzed not only the most important aspects of Venezuelan constitutional law provisions according to the 1999 Constitution, but also how the authoritarian government installed in the country since its enactment, has ruled it against the rule of the Constitution, subverting the democratic regime from within by using its own institutions and tools. The process began with the convening of a Constituent Assembly in 1999 against the provisions of the then in force 1961 Constitution, seeking to supposedly impose people's sovereignty over the principle of constitutional supremacy. What resulted was the intervention and takeover of all branches of government, being the Constituent Assembly the main tool used for assaulting the State's powers, imposing in the country an authoritarian, centralistic and militaristic government, eliminating, any sort of check and balance framework, subjecting the Judiciary to strict political control, and consequently, dismantling the rule of law. In addition, the Constituent Assembly assured that the main provisions of the new Constitution, particularly on the decentralized form of government, the principle of separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary and the representative democratic government, were to be suspended in their effective enforcement due to an endless transitional constitutional regime it imposed. It was the same "formula" of convening Constituent Assemblies departing from the Constitution then in force, that a few years later was also applied in Ecuador (2007), and ten years later was tried to be imposed in Honduras (2009), in a failed presidential attempt that in that case the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional. The idea, in any case, continues to be a recurrent one that in many countries has been proposed. The consequence of that process in Venezuela has been that since the election of the late President Hugo Chavez Frias in December 1998, whose only electoral program and proposal was to convene a Constituent Assembly, the country, formerly envied because of its democratic tradition and accomplishment during the second half of the 20th century, suffered a tragic setback regarding democratic standards, experiencing a continuous, persistent and deliberated institution demolishing process and destruction of democracy, never before occurred in the constitutional history of the country. At his death, and after fourteen years in power, the main political legacy of Chavez was no other than a country lacking the most essential elements of democracy as they are defined in the Inter American Democratic Charter, namely the assurance of the access to power and its exercise subject to the rule of law; the performing of periodic, free and fair elections based on universal and secret vote as an expression of the sovereignty of the people; the plural regime of political parties and organizations; the separation and independence of all branches of government, and the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. All this process is analyzed in this book, for which purpose the original text of the thirty Essays it contains, written and many of them published in different moments and occasions during the past years, has been preserved, so despite the repetition of some ideas and references, they remain as a testimony of the ideas expressed at the time when they were written, and on the course of the different events that led to the complete destruction of the constitutional rule and of the democratic principle in the country.
This book examines the most recent trends in the constitutional and legal regulations in all Latin American countries regarding the amparo proceeding. It analyzes the regulations of the seventeen amparo statutes in force in Latin America, as well as the regulation on the amparo guarantee established in Article 25 of the American Convention of Human Rights.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.