JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 16, 2016

A- de 2016

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

Reporting justice Jorge Iván Palacio Palacio

✓Claimant Alejandro Linares Cantillo

✓
Topic · hard data
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.

Impedimento Y Recusacion De Magistrado De La Corte Constitucional
  • Rechazar impedimento para conocer Acto Legislativo sobre Reforma de Equilibrio de Poderes y Reajuste Institucional
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

El magistrado Alejandro Linares Cantillo, con fundamento en los artículos 25 y 26 del Decreto 2067 de 1991, manifestó su impedimento para conocer el asunto de la referencia, así como el alcance de la causal que invoca, consistente en tener interés en la decisión.

Considera la Sala Plena que no existe una razón que permita concluir que se afecta de manera directa y actual la imparcialidad del doctor Linares, más allá de la calidad que ostenta como miembro de la Corte Constitucional.

En esta medida concluye, que el argumento no puede ser considerado como un interés concreto y materializado, sino que simplemente aborda un supuesto ante una eventual acusación o potencial evaluación de su conducta en el ejercicio de su cargo.

Se RECHAZA el impedimento presentado.

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. En merito de lo expuesto, la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional
  2. RESUELVE
  3. NO ACEPTAR el impedimento manifestado por el magistrado Alejandro Linares Cantillo para intervenir y decidir sobre la demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra los articulos 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 y 26 del Acto Legislativo 02 de 2015, en el marco del proceso correspondiente al expediente D-10947.
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.

Separate opinions — text available2
DissentGabriel Eduardo Mendoza MarteloDissentGloria Stella Ortiz Delgado
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.