JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)April 23, 2008

A- de 2008

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Edgar Saavedra Rojas

✓
Topic · hard data
Impedimentos Del Procurador Y El Viceprocurador General De La Nacion Para Emitir Concepto De Fondo Respecto Del Expediente De La Referencia, Esto Es, La Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra Los Articulos 237, 242, 243, 244 Y 245 (Parciales) De La Ley 906 De 2004. Acepta Los Impedimentos Del Procurador Y El Viceprocurador General De La Nacion.
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.

2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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.

See the operative part (2 points)
  1. Primero. ACEPTAR el impedimento manifestado por el Procurador General de la Nacion y el Viceprocurador General de la Nacion para rendir concepto de fondo sobre la demanda de inconstitucionalidad presentada contra los articulos 237(parcial), 242(parcial), 243(parcial), 244(parcial) y 245(parcial) de la Ley 906 de 2004, identificada con el numero de radicacion D-7226.
  2. Segundo. ORDENASE a la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional que, una vez se levante la suspension decretada en el proceso de la referencia, con ocasion del impedimento propuesto, se corra traslado por el termino que falte al Procurador General de la Nacion, para que designe el funcionario que rinda el concepto del Ministerio Publico en relacion con la demanda de inconstitucionalidad presentada contra los articulos 237(parcial), 242(parcial), 243(parcial), 244(parcial) y 245(parcial) de la Ley 906 de 2004, identificada con el numero de radicacion D-7226.
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 available1
DissentJaime Araujo Rentería
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.