The right to evidence in proceedings of constitutional control

Abstract

The fundamental right to evidence is defined within what we understand by Due Process of Law, which is the right of every person to carry out any process subject to certain minimum guarantees that ensure a fair result. An essential element is the right to evidence, since there would be no due process of law if the person did not allow his evidence to be admitted into the proceedings, or that, by admitting it, it was not valued. Being constitutional procedural law, a recent discipline that is still in the process of formation, the following concept of evidence is proposed in this connection: They are reasons, arguments, tools or means, mainly of a procedural nature, aimed at checking compliance or not with the Constitution. In this sense, it is not only about ensuring the supremacy and integrity of the political charter, but also about guaranteeing the protection of basic constitutional rights. That is, we mean the processes of abstract and concrete control of constitutionality. When the review of constitutionality is abstract, it is important to determine the defect of unconstitutionality, because if it has a material or substantial content, then the examination conducted by the judge is purely legal, therefore, as a general rule, it does not require the taking of evidence and therefore the evidentiary period is irrelevant; in fact, it is a comparison between the required norm and the Constitution to see if there is a contradiction of issues, a conflict of substance. But, if the defect has a formal or procedural content, it is important to resort to the appropriate means of proof, to determine them; It is recalled that, since the legislative procedure is somewhat complicated, (such defects) regularly arise in the process of drafting bills or legislative acts or in violation of the procedural norms provided for by the Constitution. As for the concept of proof, it is recalled that the concretization of evidence is nothing more than proving the presence or absence of certain facts that are asserted (the act of proving), which follows from these judgments, motives or reasons that convince the judge (certainty), using mechanisms or means provided by the legal system (means of proof).