JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)April 17, 1997Full bench

C-196 de 1997

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

Reporting justice Carmenza Isaza de Goméz

✓Claimant Jose Flavio Acosta Torres

✓
Topic · hard data
Ley 201/95. Arts. 81 Lit. A) 90 Parcial 9899100 Lits A) Y B) Y 175 Lit. D). Estruc. Y Organizac. De La Procuraduria. Exeq. Inhibida Sobre Art. 81.
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.

Cosa Juzgada Constitucional
  • Intervención ministerio público en proceso penal militar
Proceso Penal Militar
  • Intervención del Ministerio Público
Acto Legislativo
  • Reforma constitucional por decisión de constitucionalidad
Inhibicion En Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Inexistencia de cargo específico
Procuraduria Y Defensoria Del Pueblo
  • Incompatibilidad desempeño cargo por miembro de fuerza pública
8 topics · 8 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 201/95. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 100Ley 201/95 «literal a; literal b»UPHELD
Art. 175Ley 201/95 «literal d»UPHELD
Art. 81Ley 201/95DECLINED TO RULE
Art. 89Ley 201/95 «literal a»UPHELD
Art. 90Ley 201/95UPHELD
Art. 98Ley 201/95UPHELD
Art. 99Ley 201/95UPHELD
7 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.

  1. Primero. Decláranse EXEQUIBLES, en los apartes demandados, el literal a) del artículo 89; el artículo 90; el artículo 98; 99; los literales a) y b) del artículo 100 y el literal d) del artículo 175 de la ley 201 de 1995.
  2. Segundo. INHÍBESE de pronunciarse sobre la exequibilidad del artículo 81 de la ley 201 de 1995.
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.

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.