Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:20:14.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Self-Restraint in Search of Legitimacy: The Reform of the Argentine Supreme Court

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Alba M. Ruibal
Alba M. Ruibal*
Affiliation:
Institute of Legal Research, National University of Mexico (UNAM). [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In 2003, the Argentine executive promoted a process of Supreme Court reform that entailed limiting presidential attributions in the selection of justices. Then the renewed court implemented changes to its internal procedures that increased its own accountability mechanisms. The literature on the politics of institutional judicial independence in Latin America has developed two explanatory models: one presents reforms as an insurance policy, the other as a consequence of divided government. Both perspectives conceive of reforms as a result of political competition and as a way to limit other actors, the future government in the first case, the party in power in the second. This study, by contrast, explains the Argentine reforms as movements of strategic self-restriction, designed to build legitimacy and credibility, for the government and the court, respectively, in a context of social and institutional crisis and pressure from civil society.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 51 , Issue 3 , Fall 2009 , pp. 59 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acuña, Carlos. 2002. La dinámica político-institucional de la reforma judicial en la Argentina. Paper presented at the 7th International Congress of the Centro Latinoamericano de Administración para el Desarrollo, October 8–11.Google Scholar
Acuña, Carlos. 2005. Conversation with the author. Buenos Aires, August 26. Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (Adc). 2003. Press communication. Boletín Informativo of the Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) no. 15, December 2. Available at <http://www.farn.org.ar/docs/boletin/boletin015.html> >Google Scholar
Acuña, Carlos. 2004. Informe Adc sobre la Corte Suprema de Justicia durante el año 2003. Buenos Aires. <http://www.iniciativas.org.ar/boletines/02_docs/adc_info_corte.doc> >Google Scholar
Auyero, Javier, and Moran, Timothy. 2007. The Dynamics of Collective Violence: Dissecting Food Riots in Contemporary Argentina. Social Forces 85, 3: 1341–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Badeni, Gregorio. 1999. Instituciones de derecho constitucional. Buenos Aires : Ad-Hoc.Google Scholar
Beer, Caroline. 2006. Judicial Performance and the Rule of Law in the Mexican States. Latin American Politics and Society 48, 3 (Fall): 33–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biebesheimer, Christina. 2001. Justice Reform in Latin America and the Caribbean: The IDB Perspective. In Rule of Law in Latin America: The International Promotion of the Rule of Law, ed. Domingo Villegas, Pilar and Sieder, Rachel. London : Institute for Latin American Studies. 99–141.Google Scholar
Brinks, Daniel. 2005. Judicial Reform and Independence in Brazil and Argentina: the Beginning of a New Millennium? Texas International Law Journal 40, 3: 595–622.Google Scholar
Calvo, Ernesto. 2005. Argentina, elecciones legislativas 2005: consolidación institucional del kirchnerismo y territorialización del voto. Revista de Ciencia Política 25, 2: 153–60.Google Scholar
Carrió, Alejandro. 1996. La Corte Suprema y su independencia. Un análisis a través de la historia. Buenos Aires : Abeledo-Perrot.Google Scholar
Cayuso, Susana, and Angélica Gelli, María. 1988. Lo jurídico y lo político en la doctrina de facto: el caso argentino en 1930. Ideas en Ciencias Sociales 3, 7.Google Scholar
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS). 2004. Derechos humanos en la Argentina 2004. Buenos Aires : CELS/Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), ADC, Poder Ciudadano, FARN, INECIP, Unión de Usuarios y Consumidores. 2002a. Una corte para la democracia I. Buenos Aires. <http://www.farn.org.ar/docs/p19.pdf> >Google Scholar
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), ADC, Poder Ciudadano, FARN, INECIP, Unión de Usuarios y Consumidores. 2002b. Una corte para la democracia Ii. Buenos Aires. <http://www.farn.org.ar/docs/p20.pdf> >Google Scholar
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), ADC, Poder Ciudadano, FARN, INECIP, Unión de Usuarios y Consumidores. 2003. Una Corte para la democracia Iii. Buenos Aires. <http://www.farn.org.ar/docs/p34.pdf> >Google Scholar
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), ADC, Poder Ciudadano, FARN, INECIP, Unión de Usuarios y Consumidores. 2006. Reducción del número de miembros de la Corte Suprema. La necesidad de ratificar el rumbo ya iniciado. Buenos Aires. <http://www.cels.org.ar/common/documentos/reduccion_jueces_corte.pdf> >Google Scholar
Chávez, Rebecca Bill. 2003. The Construction of the Rule of Law in Argentina: a Tale of Two Provinces. Comparative Politics 35, 4 (July): 417–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chávez, Rebecca Bill. 2004a. The Rule of Law in Nascent Democracies: Judicial Politics in Argentina. Stanford : Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Chávez, Rebecca Bill. 2004b. The Evolution of Judicial Autonomy in Argentina: Establishing the Rule of Law in an Ultrapresidential System. Journal of Latin American Studies 36, 3: 451–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2001a. Menem quedó libre gracias a una decisión de la Corte. November 21.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2001b. El 76,1%, en desacuerdo con la liberación de Menem. November 26.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2001c. La Corte Suprema salió a sostener el corralito. December 29.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2001d. Por primera vez, la Corte estuvo en el centro de una protesta social. December 30.Google Scholar
Clarín (Buenos Aires). 2007. Otras dos encuestas dan a Kirchner y a Cristina arriba. March 5.Google Scholar
Corte Suprema de Justicia. n.d. Texts of Supreme Court Acordadas. <http://www.csj.gov.py/par97017/reglamentaciones/modulos/consulta.asp?Tipo=Acordada> >Google Scholar
Dakolias, María. 2001. Legal and Judicial Development: the Role of Civil Society in the Reform Process. Fordham International Law Journal 24: 26–55.Google Scholar
Dezalay, Ives, and Garth, Brian. 2002. The Internationalization of Palace Wars: Lawyers, Economists, and the Contest to Transform Latin American States. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epp, Charles. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Federación Judicial Argentina (FJA). 2002. Tribunal Ético a la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación. Bulletin No. 9 (September).Google Scholar
Finkel, Jodi. 2004. Judicial Reform in Argentina in the 1990s: How Electoral Incentives Shape Institutional Change. Latin American Research Review 39, 3 (October): 56–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkel, Jodi. 2005. Judicial Reform as Insurance Policy: Mexico in the 1990s. Latin American Politics and Society 47, 1 (Spring): 87–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fix Fierro, Héctor. 2003. Judicial Reform in Mexico: What Next? In Beyond Common Knowledge: Empirical Approaches to the Rule of Law, ed. Jensen, Erik and Heller, Thomas. Stanford : Stanford University Press. 240–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garavano, Germán, and Palma, Luis M.. 2002. La reforma judicial y el diálogo argentino. <http://www.unidosjusticia.org.ar/archivo/GARAVANO_PALMA_ReformaJudicial_Dialogo.pdf> >Google Scholar
Gargarella, Roberto. 2002. Piedras de papel y silencio: la crisis política argentina leída desde su sistema institucional. In Derechos humanos en la Argentina: informe 2002. Buenos Aires : CELS/Siglo XXI. 487–98.Google Scholar
Gargarella, Roberto. 2004. In Search of a Democratic Justice: What Courts Should Not Do, Argentina, 1983–2002. In Democratization and the Judiciary, ed. Siri Glopeen, Gargarella, and Skaar, Elin. London : Frank Cass. 181–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geddes, Barbara. 1994. Politician's Dilemma: Building State Capacity in Latin America. Berkeley : University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gershanik, Martín. 2005. Member, Fundación “Unidos por la Justicia.” Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 28.Google Scholar
Grindle, Merilee S. 2000. Audacious Reforms: Institutional Invention and Democracy in Latin America. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Gullco, Hernán. 2005. Coordinator, Justice and Public Litigation Area, Association for Civil Rights (Adc). Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 19.Google Scholar
Hammergren, Linn. 1998. The Politics of Justice and Justice Reform in Latin America: The Peruvian Case in Comparative Perspective. Boulder : Westview Press.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen. 2002. The Logic of Strategic Defection: Court-Executive Relations in Argentina under Democracy and Dictatorship. American Political Science Review 96, 2 (June): 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen. 2003. Checks and Balances by Other Means: Strategic Defection and Argentina's Supreme Court in the 1990s. Comparative Politics 35, 2 (January): 213–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Stephen. 1997. Passions and Constraint: On the Theory of Liberal Democracy. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, Stephen. 2003. Lineages of the Rule of Law. In Democracy and the Rule of Law, ed. María Maravall, José and Przeworski, Adam. New York : Cambridge University Press. 19–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iaryczower, Matías, Spiller, Pablo, and Tommasi, Mariano. 2002. Judicial Independence in Unstable Environments: Argentina, 1935–1998. American Journal of Political Science 16, 1 (October): 699–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inclán, Silvia. 2003. Judicial Reform and Democratization: Mexico in the 1990s. Ph.D. diss., Boston University.Google Scholar
InfoLEG. 2003. Decreto 222/2003, Poder Ejecutivo Nacional. Procedimiento—Nombramiento Corte Suprema. June 19. <http://infoleg.mecon.gov.ar/infolegInternet/verNorma.do?id=86247> >Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert. 2000. Linkages between Citizens and Politicians in Democratic Polities. Comparative Political Studies 33, 6–7: 845–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larkins, Christopher. 1998. The Judiciary and Delegative Democracy in Argentina. Comparative Politics 30, 4: 423–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitsky, Steven, and Victoria Murillo, María. 2003. Argentina Weathers the Storm. Journal of Democracy 14, 4 (October): 152–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Litvachky, Paula, and Zayat, Demián. 2007. Procesos de cambio en la justicia argentina: hacia un nuevo modelo de Corte Suprema y el futuro del Consejo de la Magistratura. In Derechos humanos en Argentina: Informe 2007. Buenos Aires : CELS/Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
Lynch, Horacio. 2005. Former president, Foro de Estudios sobre la Administración de Justicia. Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 26.Google Scholar
Magaloni, Beatriz. 2003. Authoritarianism, Democracy and the Supreme Court: Horizontal Exchange and the Rule of Law in Mexico. In Democratic Accountability in Latin America, ed. Mainwaring, Scott and Welna, Christopher. New York : Oxford University Press. 266–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAuslan, Patrick. 1997. Law, Governance, and the Development of the Market. In Good Governance and Law: Legal and Institutional Reform in Developing Countries, ed. Faundez, Julio. New York : St. Martin's Press. 25–44.Google Scholar
Mendivil, Víctor. 2005. Cosecretary, Argentine Judicial Federation (Fja). Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 26.Google Scholar
Del Diálogo Argentino, Mesa. 2002. Construir la transición. Buenos Aires. <http://www.undp.org.ar/docs/Informes_y_Documentos/17_Construir_Transicion.pdf> >Google Scholar
Miller, Jonathan. 1997. Judicial Review and Constitutional Stability: a Sociology of the U.S. Model and Its Collapse in Argentina. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 21 (Autumn): 77–176.Google Scholar
Mustapic, Ana María. 2002. Argentina: la crisis de representación y los partidos políticos. América Latina Hoy 32: 163–83.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 1997a. La Alianza y el duhaldismo tienen un plan para cambiar la corte. September 25.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 1997b. Aeropuertos: ofensiva de la Alianza. December 19.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2002a. Fijan fecha para los descargos de la corte. March 12.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2002b. El justicialismo logró salvar a la corte. October 12.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003a. El feudo austral: Santa Cruz. Enfoques. January 26.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003b. Los puntos salientes del discurso presidencial. June 5.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003c. Se profundiza la crisis interna en la corte. June 6.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003d. Construir poder, la primera meta del presidente Kirchner. June 8.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003e. Señal de transparencia. June 20.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003f. Renunció Nazareno, pero sigue la incertidumbre en la corte. June 28.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2003g. Petracchi, felicitado por el presidente. November 19.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2005a. Quinto cambio en la corte: destituyeron a Boggiano. September 29.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2005b. “Recuperar la credibilidad será difícil. Enfoques. December 11.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2006a. El gobierno planea dejar la corte con siete jueces. January 5.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2006b. El gobierno consiguió los superpoderes permanentes. August 3.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2006c. Decretos: ni necesarios ni urgentes. Enfoques. August 6.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2006d. En la corte aumenta el enojo con Kirchner. September 5.Google Scholar
La Nación (Buenos Aires). 2008. Kirchner firmó cada seis días un decreto de necesidad y urgencia. April 13.Google Scholar
Navia, Patricio, and Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2005. The Constitutional Adjudication Mosaic of Latin America. Comparative Political Studies 38: 189–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negretto, Gabriel, and Ungar, Mark. 1997. Independencia del poder judicial y estado de derecho en América Latina: los casos de Argentina y Venezuela. Política y Gobierno 4, 1: 81–114.Google Scholar
Nino, Carlos. 1993. On the Exercise of Judicial Review in Argentina. In Transition to Democracy in Latin America: The Role of the Judiciary, ed. Stotzky, Irwin. Boulder : Westview Press. 316–35.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 1994. Delegative Democracy. Journal of Democracy 5, 1 (January): 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2002. Por paliza, para que se vayan todos. October 13.Google Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2003. Nazareno salió a desmentir su renuncia y se cruzó con Béliz. June 4.Google Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2005a. Por qué cae Boggiano. June 26.Google Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2005b. Reforma de la Magistratura a medias. December 22.Google Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2006. La corte, de extra large a extra small. November 10.Google Scholar
Página/12 (Buenos Aires). 2007. Nuevo Indec con viejas denuncias. May 4.Google Scholar
Pérez, Gerónimo. 2002. Notes and Comments: Argentina's Supreme Court Enters the Political Fray in a Move Aimed at Surviving the Public Calls for Impeachment. Southwestern Journal of Law and Trade in the Americas 8: 357–72.Google Scholar
Tort, Pérez, Julia, María. 2005. Coordinator, Action for Justice Area, Foundation Poder Ciudadano. Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 21.Google Scholar
Peruzzotti, Enrique. 2002. Towards a New Politics: Citizenship and Rights in Contemporary Argentina. Citizenship Studies 6, 1: 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pochak, Andrea. 2005. Adjunct Director, Center for Legal and Social Studies (Cels). Author interview. Buenos Aires, June 8.Google Scholar
Ciudadano, Poder. 2003a. Primer diagnóstico sobre la independencia judicial. Buenos Aires. <http://www.abogadosvoluntarios.net/archivos_ftp/independencia.pdf> >Google Scholar
Ciudadano, Poder. 2003b. Infocívica. Buenos Aires, December 3. <http://www.infocivica.org.ar/nota.php?idn=565> >Google Scholar
Prillaman, William. 2000. The Judiciary and Democratic Decay in Latin America: Declining Confidence in the Rule of Law. Westport : Praeger.Google Scholar
Ramírez, Silvina. 2005. Executive Director, Institute of Criminal and Social Comparative Studies (Inecip). Author interview. Buenos Aires, May 5.Google Scholar
Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2007. Fragmentation of Power and the Emergence of an Effective Judiciary in Mexico, 1994–2000. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 1 (Spring): 31–57.Google Scholar
Sabsay, Daniel. 2003. El juicio político a la Corte Suprema en la República Argentina. Revista de Derecho Constitucional Latinoamericano 2 (January–May). Available at Global Legal Information Network, <http://www.glin.gov/view.action?glinID=173000> Google Scholar
Sagües, Néstor. 2005. La revisión judicial de la determinación legislativa de la competencia apelada de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación. Lexis Nexis Argentina, digital edition, May 6.Google Scholar
Sarles, Margaret. 2001. USAID's Support of Justice Reform in Latin America. In Rule of Law in Latin America: The International Promotion of the Rule of Law, ed. Domingo Villegas, Pilar and Sieder, Rachel. London : Institute for Latin American Studies. 47–79.Google Scholar
Schvartzman, Sebastián. 2005. Coordinator, Judicial Power/Supreme Court area, Association for Civil Rights (Adc). Author interview. Buenos Aires, April 28.Google Scholar
Smulovitz, Catalina. 1995. Constitución y poder judicial en la nueva democracia argentina. La experiencia de las instituciones. In La nueva matriz política argentina, ed. Acuña, Carlos. Buenos Aires : Nueva Visión. 71–114.Google Scholar
Thome, Joseph. 1997. Comment on McAuslan's “Law, Governance and the Development of the Market.” In Good Governance and Law: Legal and Institutional Reform in Developing Countries, ed. Faundez, Julio. New York : St. Martin's Press. 45–50.Google Scholar
Trubek, David. 2003. The “Rule of Law” in Development Assistance: Past, Present, and Future. Madison : International Institute, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Verbitsky, Horacio. 1993. Hacer la corte. La construcción de un poder absoluto sinjusticia ni control. Buenos Aires : Planeta.Google Scholar
Weingast, Barry. 1997. The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of Law. American Political Science Review 91, 2 (June): 245–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaffaroni, Eugenio. 1994. Estructuras judiciales. Buenos Aires : Ediar.Google Scholar
Zaffaroni, Eugenio. 2005. Supreme Court Justice. Author interview. Buenos Aires, July 4.Google Scholar