15 general propositions for a theory of judicial dialogues

Authors

  • Rafael Bustos Gisbert

Keywords:

Judicial dialogues, constitutional pluralism, constitutional comparative Law, judicial self restraint, equivalent protection of human rights, minimal protection of human rights, overlappings in the protection of human rights, ultra vires control in const

Abstract

In this article 15 general propositions are made about judicial dialogues in the context of constitutional pluralism. Three preliminary propositions try to locate the main questions to be developed. Eight descriptive propositions define the main features of constitutional-judicial dialogue today. Four conclusive propositions summarize the general conclusions. The main thesis sustained in the paper is that judicial dialogue is a new concept/category that may solve some problems arising in situations of constitutional pluralism. But not every quotation of a foreign jurisdiction can be considered a form of dialogue. Judicial dialogues have their own objectives, structure and solution diverse from the mere comparative dialogues among courts.

Issue

Section

STUDIES