This essay aims to utilize the concept of conviviality for connecting the coexistence of seemingly contradictory phenomena in Colombia. It argues that while conviviality implies a normative content – a society in which members do not slaughter each other is better than one in which members resort to violence – the meekness of that normative claim suggests that it is better used as an analytical tool that seeks to connect the contradictions that coexist in the real lifeworld. Colombia’s history of violence and democracy is such a contradictory case. Comparativists have situated Colombia’s deficits on the “extra-institutional playing field”, lamenting that it is a “besieged” or “threatened democracy”. Conviviality helps us to specify these “extra-institutional” defects by suggesting impediments exogenous and endogenous to the state-building logic of the Colombian nation-state.
This paper presents an analysis of the political and legal debate of the declaration of unconstitutionality of the referendum that sought the re-election presidential second term in 2010. On the other hand, it exposes the debate between those who spoke of bias and political argument in the court ruling related to the idea of "democratic security"; while others speak of the persistence of "democratic legality" consisting of autonomy guaranteed legal reasoning from deliberative processes. Finally, it is noted that the degree of institutionalization of discourse of the Court is an important factor that speaks in favor of it's independence.Keywords: Democratic security, Democratic legality, Presidential re-election, Colombia.
ResumenEste artículo presenta un análisis del debate político y jurídico de la declaración de inconstitucional del referendo que buscaba la segunda re-elección mandato presidencial en el 2010. Por otro lado, deja en evidencia el debate entre quienes hablaban de un sesgo y argumentación política en el fallo de la corte relacionado con la idea de "seguridad democrática"; mientras otros hablan de la persistencia de "legalidad democrática" consistente en la autonomía del razonamiento jurídico garantizado a partir de los procesos de deliberación. Finalmente, se señala que el grado de institucionalización del discurso en la Corte constituye un factor importante que habla a favor de su independencia.Palabras claves: Seguridad democrática, Legalidad democrática, Re-elección presidencial, Colombia.
ResumoEste trabalho apresenta uma análise do debate político e legal da declaração de inconstitucionalidade do referendo que buscava a reeleição presidencial segundo mandato em 2010. Por outro lado, ele expõe o debate entre aqueles que falavam de parcialidade e argumentos políticos na decisão judicial relacionada com a idéia de "segurança democrática"; enquanto outros falam da persistência de "legalidade democrática", que consiste de autonomia garantido raciocínio jurídico de processos deliberativos. Finalmente, refira-se que o grau de institucionalização do discurso na Corte é um fator importante que fala a favor da independência.Palavras-chave: Segurança democrátic, Legalidade democrática, Re-eleição presidencial, Colômbia
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.