JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 25, 2017

A- de 2017

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

Reporting justice José Antonio Cepeda Amarís

✓Claimant Revision De Consitucionalidad Del Decreto Ley 588 De 2017

01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

The case-law reporter has not yet indexed topics for this decision. The summary below describes what it is about.
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Con el presente auto se suspenden los términos en el expediente RDL-009, correspondiente al control de constitucionalidad del Decreto Ley 588 de 2017, por medio del cual se organiza la Comisión para el Esclarecimiento de la Verdad, la Convivencia y la No Repetición.

Se dispone que dicha suspensión se mantenga hasta tanto la Corte decida sobre la constitucionalidad del Acto Legislativo 01 de 2017 (expediente RPZ-003) y decrete la reanudación del presente proceso.

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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. SUSPENDER los terminos en el expediente RDL-009, correspondiente al control de constitucionalidad del Decreto Ley 588 de 2017, por medio del cual se organiza la Comision para el Esclarecimiento de la Verdad, la Convivencia y la No Repeticion.
  2. SEGUNDO. Esta suspension se mantendra hasta tanto la Corte Constitucional decida sobre la constitucionalidad del Acto Legislativo 01 de 2017 (expediente RPZ-003), y decrete la reanudacion del proceso RDL-009.
  3. TERCERO. La Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional realizara la anotacion respectiva en el expediente RDL-009.
  4. Comuniquese,
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

This decision has no citations or indexed topics in the Court's graph yet.