The Chilean Constitutional Court and the 2005 Reform: A Castling Between Career Judges and Academics(2013)
AbstractUsing a series of logistic regression analyses, this paper argues that the Chilean Constitutional Court is becoming more active in asserting constitutional rights. Before the reform, the pattern was favoring the incumbent government and deciding the cases by unanimity. After the reform the frequency of dissenting opinions increased, while the level of deference with the government decreased. We also argue, however, that any political analysis should proceed with caution. Career judges dominated the pre-reform Court, whereas justices coming from an academic environment were the ones filling those positions after the reform. Interestingly, Chilean judges have a long-standing reputation of being deferent with government, as well as of shielding their individual beliefs behind the unanimity of the court. Nevertheless, such attitude goes beyond politics. Similarly, most of the academics that arrived to the Court after the reform do not have explicit records of partisan affiliation. Therefore, our claim is that there is a movement towards judicial activism in the Constitutional Court; and further, that such trend is related with the decreasing influence of the legalistic culture embodied in the Chilean judiciary.
- Constitutional Law,
- Career Judges,
- Judicial Deference
Publication DateFebruary, 2013
Citation InformationDiego G. Pardow. "The Chilean Constitutional Court and the 2005 Reform: A Castling Between Career Judges and Academics" (2013)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/dpardow/12/