JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)November 6, 1996Full bench

C-594 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz

✓Claimant Esperanza Espinosa Muñoz

✓
Topic · hard data
Ley 200/95. Art. 66 Parcial. Competencia De La Corte Suprema Para Conocer Del Proceso Disciplinario Contra El Procurador. Exequible. Ver. <a Href=../1996/C-244-96.Rtf> C-244/96</A>.
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.

Proceso Disciplinario
  • Naturaleza administrativa
Procurador General De La Nacion
  • Juzgamiento disciplinario administrativo
Procuraduría General De La Nación
  • Procedimiento disciplinario de juzgamiento
4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 200/95. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 66Ley 200/95UPHELD
1 holding · 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. En merito de lo expuesto, la Corte Constitucional
  2. R E S U E L V E:
  3. Primero. ESTARSE A LO RESUELTO en la sentencia C- 244 de 1996, en cuanto declaro exequible la expresion "la Sala Plena de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, y en el evento de que haya sido postulado por esta Corporacion, lo hara la Sala Plena del Consejo de Estado", del numeral 1o del articulo 66 de la Ley 200 de 1995.
  4. Segundo. En los terminos de esta sentencia, declarar EXEQUIBLES la expresion "conoceran del proceso disciplinario que se adelanta contra el Procurador General de la Nacion, en unica instancia y mediante el procedimiento ordinario previsto en este Codigo" y el inciso
  5. segundo. del numeral 1o del articulo 66 de la Ley 200 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.

Separate opinions — text available3
DissentAlejandro Martínez CaballeroDissentJorge Arango MejíaDissentAntonio Barrera Carbonell
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.