Jurisprudencia de contrarreforma (CT: 293/2011)
In determining the contradiction in the case 293/2011 the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) makes three main claims: 1. The top hierarchy of human rights in the Mexican legal system regardless of whether they are deriving from the constitution or international treaties, 2. The prominence of constitutio...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6622335 |
| Source: | Dikê: Revista de Investigación en Derecho, Criminología y Consultoría Jurídica, ISSN 1870-6924, Nº. 15, 2014, pags. 173-185 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
In determining the contradiction in the case
293/2011 the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ)
makes three main claims: 1. The top hierarchy
of human rights in the Mexican legal
system regardless of whether they are deriving
from the constitution or international
treaties, 2. The prominence of constitutional
restrictions on human rights contained in
international treaties 3. The mandatory
criteria issued by the Inter-American Court
regardless of whether Mexico was involved
in the case or not.
This paper aims to demonstrate how the
second of the afore mentioned statements is
contrary to the principles of progressiveness,
pro homine and not a repeat of condemned
acts, also contrary to the Vienna Convention,
of the Constitution and the spirit of
the constitutional reform 2011, for which an
argument based on international doctrine
and jurisprudence, as well as an analysis of
the debates employed by of Supreme Court. |
|---|