Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

| Peer-Reviewed

Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina

Published in International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 5, Issue 1)

Received: 3 January 2022 Accepted: 8 February 2022 Published: 16 February 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

The recognition of legal pluralism by International Law on Human Rights, especially by Convention 169 of the ILO, as well as its positivization in the Constitutions of some Latin American states, allows us to affirm that this principle must move from its foundational phase to the phase of its consolidation. Through a qualitative and theoretical methodology that analyzes the state of the art proposed by recognized authors on the subject, this article aims to describe legal possibilities to overcome the current stagnation in the theoretical development of legal pluralism. With this, the author aims to describe the current perspective with which legal pluralism is studied, showing a problem of approach based on the lack of coordination and articulation between legal science, legal sociology and legal anthropology, causing a crisis and a stagnation in the development of the concept. Effectively, whit the recognition of indigenous normative systems in Latin American constitutions and their current development, it can be affirmed that the solution, of course, is that the study of legal pluralism must be carried out from the perspective of law. This is the only way to facilitate a normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous law and state law in the strict sense, which will make legal pluralism effective. In Colombia, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is not only an example of this beginning of dialogue between jurisdictions, but also leads to the conclusion that legal pluralism is constituted as a core element in the new Latin American constitutionalism to guarantee the obligatory and binding nature of indigenous normative systems through dialogue between the civilized nations that make up a state.

Published in	International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 5, Issue 1)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
Page(s)	93-100
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Law, Systems, Pluralism, Dialogue, Jurisdiction, Transitional, Peoples, Indigenous

References

[1]	Tamanaha, B. (2007). La insensatez del concepto “científico social” del pluralismo jurídico [The folly of the "social scientific" concept of legal pluralism]. En Pluralismo Jurídico, editado por Libardo Ariza Higuera y Daniel Bonilla Maldonado, Siglo del Hombre, 221-277.
[2]	Cantillo Pushaina, J. (2016). La apreciación técnico científica del peritaje psicológico en los delitos contra la integridad y la formación sexuales de los menores de edad [The technical-scientific assessment of the psychological expertise in crimes against the sexual integrity and sexual education of minors]. Cuadernos de derecho penal, 16, 133-68. https://doi.org/10.22518/20271743.678.
[3]	Cruz, E (2013). Estado plurinacional, intercultural y autonomía indígena: Una reflexión sobre los casos de Bolivia y Ecuador [Plurinational, intercultural and indigenous autonomy: A reflection on the cases of Bolivia and] Ecuador. Via Iuris, n.° 14: 55-71. https://bit.ly/35x2m1S.
[4]	Santos, B. (2020). Policy Brief 5-2020. Para una articulación descolonizadora entre la justicia estatal y la justicia propias [For a decolonizing articulation between state justice and special justice systems]. Capaz y Cedpal, 6-8 https://bit.ly/38N4YJT.
[5]	Correas, O. (2011). ¿Kelsen y el pluralismo jurídico? [Kelsen and legal pluralism?]. Crítica Jurídica. Revista latinoamericana de política, filosofía y derecho, n°. 32: 47-56. https://bit.ly/3hHpiAF.
[6]	This text is not a study of transitional justice and therefore is not intended to focus on the study of cases of the JEP or the balance of its actions. The purpose is the proposal of legal pluralism in Colombian plural positive law. Therefore, the JEP, as a state jurisdiction in Colombia, will only be a frame of reference to succinctly explain why this pluralism should be the object of study of the science of law. This is precisely because legal pluralism would be the concrete constitutional basis for the normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous and transitional state jurisdictions.
[7]	Twining, W. (2010). Normative and legal pluralism: a global perspective. Journal of Comparative & International Law 20, n°. 3: 473-518. https://bit.ly/3aXmQEO.
[8]	Griffiths, A. (2014). El concepto de pluralismo jurídico: debates sobre su significado y alcance [The concept of legal pluralism: debates on its meaning and perspectives]. En Pluralismo Jurídico e Interlegalidad, editado por Guevara Gil Jorge Armando y Aníbal Gálvez Rivas, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. 169-198.
[9]	Chiba, M. (1998). Other Phases of Legal Pluralism in the Contemporary World. Ratio Juris 11, n°. 3: 228-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9337.00088.
[10]	Larrauri, E. (2015). Introducción a la criminología y al sistema penal [ntroduction to criminology and the penal system]. 1ª ed. Madrid: Trotta, 55.
[11]	Correas, O. (2011). La teoría general del derecho frente a la antropología política [The general theory of law vs. political anthropology]. Revista pueblos y fronteras digital 6, n°. 11: 89-115, https://doi.org/10.22201/cimsur.18704115e.2011.11.135.
[12]	Twining, W. (2009). Entrevista a William Twining [Interview with William Twining]. DOXA, n°. 32: 713-728. https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA2009.32.30.
[13]	Deflem, M. (2008). Fundamental principles of the sociology of law. New York: Cambridge University Press, 209.
[14]	Griffiths, J. (2007). Qué es el pluralismo jurídico? [What is Legal pluralism?] En Pluralismo Jurídico, editado por Libardo Ariza Higuera y Daniel Bonilla Maldonado, Siglo del Hombre 143-220.
[15]	Cotterrel, R. (2010). El concepto sociológico de derecho [The sociological concept of law], Journal of the Faculty of Law of Universidad Nacional de Córdoba 1, n.° 1: 51-62. https://bit.ly/3rFTj8k.
[16]	Merry, S. (2007). Pluralismo jurídico [Legal pluralism]. En Pluralismo Jurídico, editado por Libardo Ariza Higuera y Daniel Bonilla Maldonado, Siglo del Hombre, 87-142.
[17]	Ehrlich, E. (1936). Sociology of law. Visions of a scholarly tradition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 493.
[18]	Hoekema, A. (2002). Hacia un pluralismo formal de tipo igualitario [Towards a formal and egalitarian pluralism], El otro derecho, n.° 26-27: 63-98, https://bit.ly/3o6urEK
[19]	Viciano, R. & Martínez, R. (2010). Los procesos constituyentes latinoamericanos y el nuevo paradigma constitucional [Latin American constituent processes and the new constitutional paradigm]. IUS. Revista del Instituto de Ciencias Jurídicas de Puebla A. C, n°. 25: 7-29. https://bit.ly/3kAuh7E.
[20]	Yrigoyen, R. (2016). Pluralismo jurídico y jurisdicción indígena en el horizonte del constitucionalismo pluralista [Legal pluralism and indigenous jurisdiction in the horizon of pluralist constitutionalism]. En El Estado de Derecho hoy en América Latina, compilado por Helen Ahrens, México: Konrad Adenauer 171-193.
[21]	Wolkmer, A. (2018). Pluralismo jurídico [Legal Pluralism]. Fundamentos de una nueva cultura del Derecho, 2.ª ed. (Madrid: Dykinson), 182-184.
[22]	Contreras, R. & Sánchez, M. (2013). El Artículo 2o. Constitucional ¿Pluralismo jurídico en México? [Article 2º of the Constitution: Legal pluralism in Mexico?] En Constitucionalismo: dos siglos de su nacimiento en América Latina, coordinado por César Astudillo Reyes y Jorge Carpizo, México: UNAM 623-655.
[23]	Colombia, Political Constitution of the Republic of Colombia, Constitutional Gazette No. 116, July 20, 1991, art. 1 and 7.
[24]	Peru, Political Constitution of Peru, promulgated, December 29, 1993, Art. 2.19.
[25]	Venezuela, Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, promulgated, December 20, 1999, Art. 6.
[26]	Andrade, W. (2016). Pluralismo jurídico y deslinde jurisdiccional [Legal pluralism and juridictional demarcation]. Anuario de Derecho Constitucional Latinoamericano 2016, 22, 661-75.
[27]	Carpio, M. (2015). Pluralismo jurídico en el Ecuador existencia de una verdadera aplicabilidad en el ámbito penal? [Legal pluralism in Ecuador: Is there a true applicability in the criminal field?] USFQ Law Review 2, n°. 1: 207-230. https://bit.ly/39m79Et.
[28]	Del Real Alcalá, J. (2015). Análisis de los derechos fundamentales y de la plurinacionalidad en la Constitución boliviana de 2009 [Analysis of fundamental rights and plurinationality in the Bolivian Constitution of 2009]. Anuario de Derecho Constitucional Latinoamericano 2015 21: 537-568.
[29]	In Latin America, Mexico (art. 1), Colombia (art. 93), Peru (Fourth Final and Transitory Provision), Venezuela (art. 23), Bolivia (arts. 13. IV, 256 and 410) and Ecuador (arts. 424-428) have adopted the constitutionality block. Bolivia expressly enshrined the block formula of constitutionality in Article 410.II of the Constitution.
[30]	González, J. (1999). Los paradigmas constitucionales y los derechos indígenas [Constitutional paradigms and indigenous rights], in Balance y perspectivas del derecho social y los pueblos indios de Mesoamérica. VIII Jornadas Lascasianas, coord. Jose Emilio Rolando Ordóñez Cifuentes (Mexico City: UNAM), 93-119.
[31]	Arturo, R. (2003) El problema y el método de la ciencia del derecho penal [Problem and method of criminal law] (Bogotá: Temis), 8-9.
[32]	Figuera, S. (2015). Jurisdicción Especial Indígena en Latinoamérica. Una referencia específica al sistema jurídico colombiano [Special Indigenous Jurisdiction in Latin America. A specific reference to the Colombian legal system], Barranquilla: Ibáñez, 33.
[33]	Derrida, J. (1992). Fuerza de Ley: ‘El fundamento de la autoridad’ [Force of Law: 'The foundation of authority'], DOXA, n.° 11: 129-191. https://doi.org/10.14198/DOXA1992.11.06.
[34]	Rojas, F. (2016), Por una genealogía del saber jurídico [For a genealogy of legal knowledge], Anuario de Derecho Constitucional Latinoamericano 2016, 22: 645-660.
[35]	Dworkin, R. (2012). Los derechos en serio [Rights for real] (Barcelona: Ariel), 133.
[36]	Colombia, Special Jurisdiction for Peace, Ethnic Commission, “Concept”, May 29, 2020.
[37]	Colombia, Special Jurisdiction for Peace, Chamber for the Recognition of Truth and Responsibility and Determination of Facts and Conduct, “Auto” No. 264, December 18, 2019.
[38]	Yampara, S. (2007). Cosmovisión indígena y el Qhatho 16 de julio de El Alto de La Paz-Bolivia [Indigenous Cosmovision and El Qhatho July 16 of El Alto de La Paz - Bolivia], in Pueblos indígenas y ciudadanía “Los indígenas urbanos”, ed. Fondo Indígena (La Paz: Fondo Indígena), 113-4.
[39]	Colombia, Special Jurisdiction for Peace, Ethnic Commission, “Concept”, December 4, 2018.
[40]	Engle, K. (2018). El desarrollo indígena, una promesa esquiva [Indigenous development, an elusive promise]. Derechos, cultura, estrategia (Bogotá: Siglo del Hombre Editores), 98.
[41]	Chevalier, (1998). Vers un droit post-moderne? Les transformations de la régulation juridique [Towards a post-modern law? The transformations of legal regulation], Revue du Droit Public, no. 3: 659-90, quoted in Ramelli, A. (2019). Diálogos entre la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y los jueces constitucionales latinoamericanos (Bogotá: Tirant lo Blanch), 25.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. (2022). Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. International Journal of Law and Society, 5(1), 93-100. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. Int. J. Law Soc. 2022, 5(1), 93-100. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. Int J Law Soc. 2022;5(1):93-100. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21,
  author = {Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina},
  title = {Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {5},
  number = {1},
  pages = {93-100},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20220501.21},
  abstract = {The recognition of legal pluralism by International Law on Human Rights, especially by Convention 169 of the ILO, as well as its positivization in the Constitutions of some Latin American states, allows us to affirm that this principle must move from its foundational phase to the phase of its consolidation. Through a qualitative and theoretical methodology that analyzes the state of the art proposed by recognized authors on the subject, this article aims to describe legal possibilities to overcome the current stagnation in the theoretical development of legal pluralism. With this, the author aims to describe the current perspective with which legal pluralism is studied, showing a problem of approach based on the lack of coordination and articulation between legal science, legal sociology and legal anthropology, causing a crisis and a stagnation in the development of the concept. Effectively, whit the recognition of indigenous normative systems in Latin American constitutions and their current development, it can be affirmed that the solution, of course, is that the study of legal pluralism must be carried out from the perspective of law. This is the only way to facilitate a normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous law and state law in the strict sense, which will make legal pluralism effective. In Colombia, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is not only an example of this beginning of dialogue between jurisdictions, but also leads to the conclusion that legal pluralism is constituted as a core element in the new Latin American constitutionalism to guarantee the obligatory and binding nature of indigenous normative systems through dialogue between the civilized nations that make up a state.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America
AU  - Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina
Y1  - 2022/02/16
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 93
EP  - 100
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
AB  - The recognition of legal pluralism by International Law on Human Rights, especially by Convention 169 of the ILO, as well as its positivization in the Constitutions of some Latin American states, allows us to affirm that this principle must move from its foundational phase to the phase of its consolidation. Through a qualitative and theoretical methodology that analyzes the state of the art proposed by recognized authors on the subject, this article aims to describe legal possibilities to overcome the current stagnation in the theoretical development of legal pluralism. With this, the author aims to describe the current perspective with which legal pluralism is studied, showing a problem of approach based on the lack of coordination and articulation between legal science, legal sociology and legal anthropology, causing a crisis and a stagnation in the development of the concept. Effectively, whit the recognition of indigenous normative systems in Latin American constitutions and their current development, it can be affirmed that the solution, of course, is that the study of legal pluralism must be carried out from the perspective of law. This is the only way to facilitate a normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous law and state law in the strict sense, which will make legal pluralism effective. In Colombia, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is not only an example of this beginning of dialogue between jurisdictions, but also leads to the conclusion that legal pluralism is constituted as a core element in the new Latin American constitutionalism to guarantee the obligatory and binding nature of indigenous normative systems through dialogue between the civilized nations that make up a state.
VL  - 5
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina

Constitutional Law Department, Mayor de San Andrés University, La Paz, Bolivia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. (2022). Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. International Journal of Law and Society, 5(1), 93-100. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. Int. J. Law Soc. 2022, 5(1), 93-100. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina. Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America. Int J Law Soc. 2022;5(1):93-100. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21,
  author = {Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina},
  title = {Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {5},
  number = {1},
  pages = {93-100},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20220501.21},
  abstract = {The recognition of legal pluralism by International Law on Human Rights, especially by Convention 169 of the ILO, as well as its positivization in the Constitutions of some Latin American states, allows us to affirm that this principle must move from its foundational phase to the phase of its consolidation. Through a qualitative and theoretical methodology that analyzes the state of the art proposed by recognized authors on the subject, this article aims to describe legal possibilities to overcome the current stagnation in the theoretical development of legal pluralism. With this, the author aims to describe the current perspective with which legal pluralism is studied, showing a problem of approach based on the lack of coordination and articulation between legal science, legal sociology and legal anthropology, causing a crisis and a stagnation in the development of the concept. Effectively, whit the recognition of indigenous normative systems in Latin American constitutions and their current development, it can be affirmed that the solution, of course, is that the study of legal pluralism must be carried out from the perspective of law. This is the only way to facilitate a normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous law and state law in the strict sense, which will make legal pluralism effective. In Colombia, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is not only an example of this beginning of dialogue between jurisdictions, but also leads to the conclusion that legal pluralism is constituted as a core element in the new Latin American constitutionalism to guarantee the obligatory and binding nature of indigenous normative systems through dialogue between the civilized nations that make up a state.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Legal Pluralism: Opportunities for Development from a Constitutional Perspective in Latin America
AU  - Juan Jose Cantillo Pushaina
Y1  - 2022/02/16
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 93
EP  - 100
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.21
AB  - The recognition of legal pluralism by International Law on Human Rights, especially by Convention 169 of the ILO, as well as its positivization in the Constitutions of some Latin American states, allows us to affirm that this principle must move from its foundational phase to the phase of its consolidation. Through a qualitative and theoretical methodology that analyzes the state of the art proposed by recognized authors on the subject, this article aims to describe legal possibilities to overcome the current stagnation in the theoretical development of legal pluralism. With this, the author aims to describe the current perspective with which legal pluralism is studied, showing a problem of approach based on the lack of coordination and articulation between legal science, legal sociology and legal anthropology, causing a crisis and a stagnation in the development of the concept. Effectively, whit the recognition of indigenous normative systems in Latin American constitutions and their current development, it can be affirmed that the solution, of course, is that the study of legal pluralism must be carried out from the perspective of law. This is the only way to facilitate a normative and interjurisdictional dialogue between indigenous law and state law in the strict sense, which will make legal pluralism effective. In Colombia, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is not only an example of this beginning of dialogue between jurisdictions, but also leads to the conclusion that legal pluralism is constituted as a core element in the new Latin American constitutionalism to guarantee the obligatory and binding nature of indigenous normative systems through dialogue between the civilized nations that make up a state.
VL  - 5
IS  - 1
ER  -

Copy | Download