JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)May 27, 1999Full bench

C-370 de 1999

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

Reporting justice Carlos Gaviria Díaz

✓Claimant Carlos Alberto Lozano Y Otros

✓
Topic · hard data
Ley 443/98. Arts. 5 Y 39 Parciales; 4148-2 Y 56. Normas Sobre Carrera Administrativa. Servicio Civil. Exequible E Inexequible.
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.

Comision Departamental Del Servicio Civil
  • Presencia del gobernador o su delegado
Planta De Personal De Entidades Territoriales
  • Presentación de estudios de justificación a comisiones del servicio civil y contralorías
  • Reforma no requiere aprobación de Departamento Administrativo de Función Pública
3 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 443/98. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 39Ley 443/98UPHELD
Art. 41Ley 443/98UPHELD
Art. 56Ley 443/98 «parágrafo 3»UPHELD
3 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 (5 points)
  1. administrando justicia en nombre del Pueblo y, por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. Primero. Declarar exequibles el artículo 41 y el parágrafo 3 del artículo 56 de la ley 443/98, pero únicamente por los cargos aquí analizados.
  4. Segundo. Declarar exequibles los apartes demandados de los artículos 39 y 48-2 de la misma ley.
  5. Tercero. Estarse a lo resuelto en la sentencia C-368 del 27 de mayo de 1999, que declaró inexequible la expresión "e Inspector de Tránsito y Transporte o el que haga sus veces" contenida en el artículo 5 de la ley 443 de 1998.
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.