This paper examines certain practices of academic colonization in the way constitutional history has been approached, both by legal historians and constitutionalists. Drawing on concrete examples, it argues that every time a new fashionable transnational theory appears, the interpretation of Colombia’s past constitutions is reshaped. This dynamic has prevented a correct and decolonized reading of our own constitutional history.

This article analyzes the socio-environmental impacts of rock salt mining in urban areas, based on a case study of the municipality of Maceió, in northeastern Brazil, where mining activities have caused structural effects on the territory and the lives of thousands of residents. The research aimed to clarify the social and environmental repercussions of the extractive activity carried out by the company Braskem S.A., with a focus on the vulnerabilities imposed on the local population and the institutional response to the resulting damages. To this end, a qualitative, exploratory, and explanatory approach was adopted, based on documentary and bibliographic research, using the hypothetical-deductive method, guided by the hypothesis that the fundamental right to a healthy environment has been systematically subordinated to economic interests. The analysis was guided by the theoretical framework of environmental justice and collective environmental law, which enabled the interpretation of the observed socio-environmental conflicts as paradigmatic expressions of structural inequality in the distribution of risks and resources. This is a representative study of the unequal effects of extractive activities in urban contexts, providing relevant insights for the debate on sustainability, justice and human dignity. The results show that, although compensation and reparation mechanisms have been implemented, omissions by public authorities and attempts to expand mining activities into new areas persisted, confirming the urgent need to strengthen the legal protection of vulnerable urban territories and to promote a sustainable development model that prioritizes fundamental collective rights.

Since the Colombian Constitutional Court established the constitutional replacement doctrine in 2003, there has been significant interest regarding its philosophical foundations, implications for the structure of the state, and political consequences. However, the study of the argumentative structure used by the Constitutional Court when applying this theory has been relatively sidelined from academic discussion. Therefore, this article presents an analysis of the evolution in the methodology of the replacement test using a qualitative methodology of jurisprudential review, that will explore the reasoning deployed by the Constitutional Judges, outlining their argumentative model and emphasizing cases where it has been modified. This article will demonstrate that the replacement test has not been immutable, evolving from a typical syllogism to a stage that appears to incorporate the principle of proportionality, allowing for the modulation of the intensity of control. Consequently, it will be concluded that none of the methods employed by the Constitutional Court satisfy the requirements to be considered rational according to the theory of legal argumentation.

This article analyzes the relationships between international law and domestic law in the field of human rights protection within the Colombian legal system. As a paradigmatic case, it examines Becerra Barney vs. the Colombian State, heard by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, in the context of the so-called “faceless justice.” The article reviews various theoretical approaches that help explain the interaction between different legal orders, with the aim of contrasting them with the actual practices of the Colombian State in fulfilling its international obligations. For this purpose, it explores how the Colombian internal order structures its opening and reception clauses concerning international law. Ultimately, the article intends to (i) highlight the asymmetry that exists between the aforementioned clauses, due to a deficient reception process, and (ii) show how, in practice, with respect to compliance with international commitments, the Colombian State aligns, incorrectly, with dualist theoretical parameters, despite publicly claiming adherence to judicial dialogue and constitutional pluralism.

This article presents intersectional and interdisciplinary approaches to gynecological- obstetric violence in Mexico. It includes a historical and philosophical analysis of the hegemonic model of motherhood, its implications on the lives of racialized women, and violent gynecological-obstetric care in the public health system. The origins of the motherhood model between the 17th and 19th centuries are explored, alongside its repercussions in contemporary society. The article also critiques public health policies implemented at the beginning of the 20th century, influenced by the eugenics movement, and examines their relationship with the current public health system, which has normalized forced contraception targeting racialized, working-class, peasant, impoverished and/or migrant women, as well as the violation of their human rights in delivery rooms. Furthermore, a critique is made of in Mexico’s fragmented and inefficient health system, particularly in providing medical care to women in areas such as sexual and reproductive health, cervical cancer, breast cancer, gynecological-obstetric violence, and forced contraception. Finally, it concludes with reflections on the need for an anti-racist and anti-patriarchal perspective regarding the guarantee of the right to health, the right to care, sexual and reproductive rights, and, more broadly, human rights for racialized women.

Exogenous events to households and beyond the control of the women within them often result in women assuming more unpaid caregiving responsibilities, further restricting their time and possibilities to participate in the paid labor market. This article proposes an index to classify men and women in terms of their vulnerability to devote more hours to unpaid care work based on their individual and household characteristics, including the presence of motorcycle users. We associate a greater probability of road traffic accidents occurring when a household member is a motorcyclist, which creates and additional potential demand for caregiving within the household. Such external events disproportionately affect women, particularly those who already devote significant time to unpaid care work. In other words, a road accident involving a household member increases the vulnerability of women who already primary caregivers. Using data from the Gran Encuesta de Hogares for Cali, the index is estimated, showing that women are more vulnerable than men when a household member is affected by a road traffic accident.

The accelerated process of population aging raises questions about the redistribution of eldercare. Women continue to bear a greater share of this responsibility, making it essential to examine the extent to which the right to care has been recognized in the context of elderly care. This essay analyzes the redistributive effects of recognizing the right to care for the elderly, considering the particular challenges of eldercare especially in light of ageist structures embedded in the law. To this end, it examines the scope of the concept of the right to care that permeates the redistributive discourses that impact how eldercare is provided in families, the market and the scope of the obligations of the States in this area.

This paper analyzes how the term dignity appears in relation to the term person in the discourse of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. It emphasizes the paragraphs in which the Interamerican Court has referred to both notions and the formulas it uses in this regard, aiming to expose dynamic relationships between them. The purpose is to detect and describe the formulas in which these terms appear in the Court’s discourse over time, in relation to specific factual scenarios and the interaction between the paragraphs containing those formulas. The hypothesis guiding this paper is that, although these formulas are relevant in the Court’s judgments and opinions to support arguments, they do not possess concrete content with directives on how to put into practice the human rights in question or how to interpret what it means for a person to have dignity.

This text presents a review of the book Injustice Without End: The Gender Pension Gap and Ideas to Close it, edited by Laura Porras-Santanilla and Natalia Ramírez-Bustamante. Throughout the text, I argue that the book contributes to documenting a key phenomenon that has been understudied in Colombia: the double gender pension gap. To this end, I discuss the prior research agenda that led to the book’s publication, its main findings and the research directions it opens. I also relate the findings to one of its main causes: the unfair distribution of care responsibilities.