The interpretation and the judicial practice from a sistematic perspective of the constitution

Abstract

Starting from what has been denominated as the new law, this paper studies of one of the central problems from the theoretical debate, which we attend in Colombia and consits on the constitutional interpretation and the reach that modern Constitutional Tribunals can have on the matter. Taking as reference the compared doctrine and what the Constituent of 1991 delineated, it is concluded that the constitutional interpreter presents wide powers to approach the function of defense of the constitutional text that has been entrusted him. This text should be considered as a reference in all its integrity, for which is not only in charge of the safeguard of procedimental rules, but rather it is legitimated to take his pronouncement until connecting it with the material content of the text. The law, that is the frame to which the interpreter must adjust, is not more than interpretation; and the supreme and last interpreter of the constitutional precepts is not other than the judge, even above what legislators and governors can estimate in opposite in their political considerations. With this, the vision of the classic liberal State is formally overcome.