JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 10, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Juan Carlos Cortés González

✓Claimant Bernal Cano Natalia·Respondent --

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.

Recurso De Suplica Contra Rechazo Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Requisitos de procedencia
  • Incumplimiento de la carga argumentativa
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

La demanda se rechazó porque el escrito de subsanación no corrigió los problemas argumentativos que presentaban los cargos formulados, ni atendió las específicas exigencias planteadas en el auto de inadmisión.

La Sala Plena de la Corporación consideró que el recurso deprecado no acreditó la carga argumentativa mínima para emitir un pronunciamiento de fondo y, por ello, procedió a RECHAZARLO.

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 falta de carga argumentativa, el recurso de súplica presentado por Doctora Natalia Bernal Cano contra el auto del 21 de mayo de 2024, que rechazó las demandas de inconstitucionalidad presentadas dentro de los expedientes acumulados D-15819 y D-15831, contra los artículos 122 y 125 del Código Penal (Ley 599 de 2000).
  2. SEGUNDO. A través de la Secretaría General de la Corte Constitucional, COMUNICAR esta decisión a la recurrente, indicándole que contra la misma no proceden recursos.
  3. TERCERO. Una vez comunicada esta decisión, archívese el expediente.
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.