La constitucionalidad del segundo estado de excepción por calamidad publica en ocasión a la pandemia covid-19.

Abstract

The objective of this work is to establish if there was an adequate application of the principles of the states of exception in the opinion N ° 3-20-EE / 20 that declares a second state of exception. This purpose arises from the different interpretations that the constitutional judges had at the time of issuing constitutional opinion N ° 3-20-EE / 20, which in its text had two main votes to consider. The majority vote that was declined due to the constitutionality of a second declaration under certain parameters and the saved vote that dissented from the majority vote because it considered that temporal, spatial and material limits of the state of exception were transgressed In both cases, different types of interpretations that influenced the moment of applying the constitutional principles that govern states of exception. Based on the above, to understand the legal guidelines that the judges had to resolve this opinion, the concepts, nature and purpose of the states of exception and the abstract control of constitutionality of the decrees of state of exception were developed, as well as their development doctrinal, jurisprudential and legal. Along with this information, deductive-inductive, exegetical, historical and analytical methods were used, as well as the data collection technique, allowing the information to be obtained in a bibliographic way from various sources. As a preliminary and referential point, before giving results in this research, the argumentative conflict and the main arguments of the majority vote and the saved vote were mentioned, in order to have a clear vision of these. Developing a solid theoretical base and the arguments of both votes, I allowed myself to infer two transcendental aspects that allowed me to conclude. The first one that tries to clarify the types of interpretation used and their purpose and their impact on the constitutional principles within the majority and minority vote, and the second that develops the nature of deferred unconstitutionality as a mechanism that avoids a prolongation of the second declaration under study, making them coincide from an analysis based on the principle of reasonableness Taking as a conclusion of this work, that the application of the constitutional principles will depend on the hermeneutical exercise of each judge for each case and the reasonableness that is applied, it is thus after an analysis of the requirements of the grounds, of the constitutional principles that govern For the states of exception, of the interpretations of each vote and relating them to the principle of reasonableness, I prefer that the formal interpretation of the saved vote, attributing greater reasonableness to the saved vote by proposing proportional means to reach the purpose and nature of the states of exception and of the control of abstract constitutionality of the declaration of state of exception. As recommendations, it was said that the current Court has a qualitative difference with respect to the argumentation with its successors, recommended to continue working on constitutional legal hermeneutics. In the same way, that there is a jurisprudential development of all the causes and principles that are applicable to the state of exception so that there is legal certainty.