JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)January 20, 1994Full bench

C-010 de 1994

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

Reporting justice Fabio Morón Díaz

✓Claimant Alvaro Ochoa

✓
Topic · hard data
Dec. 2700/91. Art 431 #1 Parcial. Competencia Para El Tramite Y Resolucion Judicial De La Solicitud De Habeas Corpus. Exequible.
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.

Habeas Corpus
  • Interposición
  • Naturaleza
  • Privación de libertad por particulares
  • Trámite
2 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 2700/91. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 431Decreto 2700/91UPHELD
2 holdings · source: operative part of the ruling
·

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. en nombre del Pueblo y por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. Declarar EXEQUIBLE la parte que dice "pero el trámite corresponde exclusivamente al Juez Penal" del numeral
  4. primero. del artículo 431 del decreto 2700 de 1991 "Por el cual se expiden las normas de procedimiento penal", sin perjuicio de lo previsto por el artículo 430 del C.P.P., modificado por el artículo 2o. de la Ley 15 de 1992, declarado exequible en sentencia No. C-301 de 1993.
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 available3
DissentAlejandro Martínez CaballeroDissentJorge Arango MejíaDissentCarlos Gaviria Díaz
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.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

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