Efectos de las sentencias constitucionales en el Derecho argentino.

Abstract

In the Argentinean system, the regulation of the effects of the judicial decisions regarding constitutional law has been made, fundamentally, by the judicial review jurisprudence and custom. Firstly, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, which defines itself as Constitutional Court, has adopted beside traditional decisions, that admit or refuse the allegation of unconstitutionality of a law, a new model of decisions, which are denominated «interpretative» or «manipulative» (that add, subtract or substitute the constitutional rule), «exhortative» and «progressive». In addition to that, originally the decisions had only effects inter partes, but the Court itself have created the theory of the mandatory effects of the constitutional interpretation stated in its decisions, even though it allows the possibility that the judge may avoid the application of the rule stated by the Court by giving actual and different reasons from the ones exposed by the Supreme Court. Besides that, the decisions that declare unconstitutional a law have retroactive effects, but there are relevant exceptions. In state level there are diverse examples of decisions with erga omnes effects.