Publication: Propuesta para una plena justiciabilidad de los derechos sociales frente al legislador
Loading...
Identifiers
Publication date
2016-06
Defense date
Authors
Advisors
Tutors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Instituto de Derechos Humanos Bartolomé de las Casas; Dykinson
Abstract
Este ensayo pretende proporcionar argumentos iusteóricos que permitan ampliar
la justiciabilidad de los derechos sociales con respecto al legislador: en concreto,
en el caso de omisiones totales y, sobre todo, de recortes presupuestarios
generalizados en el Estado social. En primer lugar, ilustraremos los presupuestos
histórico-conceptuales de la tesis según la cual las violaciones legislativas
de estos derechos solo son controlables parcialmente por los jueces. En segundo
lugar, nos ocuparemos de los argumentos contrarios más comunes a la justiciabilidad
de los derechos sociales y, específicamente, de una cierta concepción
de la separación de poderes, en nombre de la cual una plena garantía jurisdiccional
de los derechos sociales llevaría inexorablemente a los jueces a sustituir
al legislador. La crítica de esta concepción permitirá, por último, reconstruir
de manera diferente las obligaciones legislativas en materia de justicia social y
proponer instrumentos procesales concretos para su protección, sin transformar
por ello a los jueces en órganos de decisión colectiva.
The article aims to present legal theoretical arguments in favour of the judicial protection of social rights (the s.c. justiciability) in cases of legislative ‘omissiones totales’ and spending cuts. The first step consists of showing the historical-conceptual reasons as to why legislative violations of these social rights can be only partially controlled by judges. The second step will deal with the most common arguments against the justiciability of social rights and, in particular, on a certain conception of separation of powers, according to which judges’ subjecting to scrutiny social rights would take on legislative powers. Through a deep critique of this conception it will be offered an alternative account of the duties that constitutions impose on legislatures in the field of social rights: accordingly, it will be possible to suggest concrete judicial remedies for the protection of social rights without transforming judges in political organs of collective decisions (legislative-like).
The article aims to present legal theoretical arguments in favour of the judicial protection of social rights (the s.c. justiciability) in cases of legislative ‘omissiones totales’ and spending cuts. The first step consists of showing the historical-conceptual reasons as to why legislative violations of these social rights can be only partially controlled by judges. The second step will deal with the most common arguments against the justiciability of social rights and, in particular, on a certain conception of separation of powers, according to which judges’ subjecting to scrutiny social rights would take on legislative powers. Through a deep critique of this conception it will be offered an alternative account of the duties that constitutions impose on legislatures in the field of social rights: accordingly, it will be possible to suggest concrete judicial remedies for the protection of social rights without transforming judges in political organs of collective decisions (legislative-like).
Description
Keywords
Teoría del Derecho, Derechos sociales, Justiciabilidad, Separación de poderes, Theory of Law, Social rights, Justiciability
Bibliographic citation
Derechos y Libertades: revista de filosofía del derecho y derechos humanos, junio 2016, n. 35, pp. 53-80