JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)June 29, 2016

A- de 2016

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Jose Reinel Sanchez Orjuela

01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica interpuesto en contra de la sentencia T-667/15.

El memorialista argumentó que en la providencia cuestionada existe un error judicial, debido a la falta de aplicación de tratados internacionales ratificados por Colombia sobre Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos.

Específicamente, indicó que la privación injusta de la libertad que sufrió merece ser calificada como un crimen de lesa humanidad y por tanto, ser imprescriptible.

La Sala decidió RECHAZAR por improcedente el recurso de súplica propuesto, por cuanto este incidente sólo procede contra el auto de rechazo de una demanda de inconstitucionalidad.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

  1. Primero. RECHAZAR por improcedente el "recurso de suplica" presentado por el senor Jose Reinel Sanchez Orjuela, en contra de la sentencia T-667 de 2015 proferida por la Sala Quinta de Revision.
  2. Segundo. Comuniquese la presente providencia al peticionario, informandole que contra ella no procede recurso alguno.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.