Conceptualizar y medir la cultura legal.

Evidencia a partir de una encuesta a Jueces Federales Mexicanos

Palabras clave: cultura legal; política judicial; medición cultura legal; conducta judicial

Resumen

Proponemos una nueva aproximacióna a la “cultura legal”, un concepto difuso aunque importante para el campo de la política judicial. Lo definimos como un conjunto de actitudes, prácticas y expectativas sobre cómo el marco jurídico debería ser interpretado. Proponemos que estas disposiciones resultan en diferencias acerca de la conducta considerada apropiada en el trabajo jurisdiccional. Desde la perspectiva desarrollada la cultura legal tiene tres dimensiones relevantes: las rutinas interpretativas de los jueces, su visión sobre su rol en el sistema político y su visión sobre su rol dentro del propio poder judicial. A fin de mostrar la pertinencia de esta aproximación presentamos los resultados de una encuesta realizada a jueces federales mexicanos que midió las diferentes dimensiones de su cultura legal y sus consecuencias en la conducta judicial en casos hipotéticos. La encuesta midió actitudes sobre el proceso de adjudicación, en particular exploramos cómo los jueces definen sus prerrogativas formales y también sus rutinas de interpretación. Además indagó sobre la manera en que conciben sus obligaciones en el sistema político y su deferencia respecto de la jerarquía judicial al momento de incorporar criterios innovadores. Nuestro análisis indica la presencia de espacios anti-formalistas y espacios formalistas en el Poder Judicial Federal mexicano. Resultados preliminares también muestran que el efecto de ciertos atributos de cultura legal es sustantivamente importante en el comportamiento pro-derechos característico de jueces anti-formalistas y distinto de la ideología política de éstos.

Citas

Adler Lomnitz, Larissa and Héctor Fix-Zamudio. 2002. “Cultural Elements in the Practice of Law in Mexico: Informal Networks in a Formal System.” In Global Prescriptions: The Production, Exportation and Importation of a New Legal Orthodoxy, eds. Dezalay, Yves and Bryant Garth. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Anaya, Alejandro. 2012. El país bajo presión. Debatiendo el paper del escrutinio internacional de derechos humanos sobre México. Mexico: CIDE
Bailey, Michael and Forrest Maltzman. 2008. “Does Legal Doctrine Matter? Unpacking Law and Policy Preferences on the U.S. Supreme Court,” in American Political Science Review, 102: 369-384
Baum, Lawrence. 1994. “What Judges Want: Judges’ Goals and Judicial Behavior,” in Political Research Quarterly, 47: 749-768
Bybee, Keith. 2012. “Paying Attention to What Judges Say: New Directions in the Study of Judicial Decision Making,” in Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 8: 69-84
Caballero, José Luis. 2009. La incorporación de los tratados internacionales sobre derechos humanos en España y México. Mexico: Porrúa
Carbonell, Miguel. 2000. Constitución, reforma constitucional y Fuentes del derecho en México. Mexico: Porrúa
Clark, Tom and Benjamin Lauderdale. 2010. “Locating Supreme Court Opinions in Doctrine Space,” in American Journal of Political Science, 54(4): 871-890
Cotterrell, Roger. 1997. “The Concept of Legal Culture”. In Comparing Legal Cultures, ed. David Nelken. Aldershot: Darmouth Publishing Group.
Couso, Javier, Alexandra Huneeus, and Rachel Sieder, eds. 2010. Cultures of Legality: Judicialization and Political Activism in Latin America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press
Couso, Javier. 2010. “The Transformation of Constitutional Discourse and the Judicialization of Politics in Latin America.” In Cultures of Legality: Judicialization and Political Activism in Latin America, ed. Javier Couso, Alexandra Huneeus, and Rachel Sieder. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Couso, Javier and Lisa Hilbink. 2011. “From Quietism to Incipient Activism: The Institutional and Ideological Roots of Rights Adjudication in Chile.” In Courts in Latin America, ed. Gretchen Helmke and Julio Ríos Figueroa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dulitzky, Ariel. 2015. “An Inter-American Constitutional Court? The Invention of the Conventionality Control by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,” in Texas International Law Journal, 50: 45-93
Epstein, Lee, and Jack Knight. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington: CQ Press.
Feest, Johannes, and Erhard Blankenburg. eds. 1997. Changing Legal Cultures. Oñati: IISL
Friedman, Barry. 2006. “Taking Law Seriously.” Perspectives on Politics 4(2): 261-276.
Friedman, Lawrence, and Rogelio Perez-Perdomo. 2003. Legal Culture in the Age of Globalization: Latin America and Latin Europe. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Gillman, Howard. 2001. “What’s The Law Got To Do With It? Judicial Behavioralists Test the Legal Model of Judicial Decision Making,” in Law and Social Inquiry, 26: 465-504
Gillman, Howard. 2002. “How Political Parties Can Use the Courts to Advance Their Agendas: Federal Courts in the United States, 1875-1891,” in American Political Science Review 96 (3): 511–524.
Helmke, Gretchen. 2005. Courts Under Constraints: Judges, Generals, and Presidents in Argentina. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hilbink, Lisa. 2007. Judges Beyond Politics in Democracy and Dictatorship: Lessons from Chile. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hilbink, Lisa. 2012. “The Origins of Positive Judicial Independence,” in World Politics 64 (4): 587-621
Ingram, Matthew. 2012. “Crafting Courts in New Democracies: Ideology and Judicial Council Reform in Three Mexican States,” in Comparative Politics, 44(4): 439-458
Kahn, Ronald. 1999. “Institutionalized Norms and Supreme Court Decision Making: The Rehnquist Court on Privacy and Religion.” In Supreme Court Decision Making: New Institutionalist Approaches, Clayton, Cornell and Howard Gillman eds. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Kapiszewski, Diana. 2012. High Courts and Economic Governance in Argentina and Brazil. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kapiszewski, Diana, Gordon Silverstein, and Robert Kagan. eds. 2013. Consequential Courts. New York: Cambridge University Press
Kastellec, Jonathan. 2011. “Hierarchical and Collegial Politics in the US Courts of Appeals,” in Journal of Politics, 73(2): 345-361
Landa, Dimitri, and Jeffrey Lax. 2009. “Legal Doctrine in Collegial Courts,” in Journal of Politics, 71(3): 946-963
Lax, Jeffrey. 2011. “The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine,” in Annual Review of Political Science 14: 131-157
Magaloni, Ana Laura. 2007. “Por qué la Suprema Corte no ha sido un instrument para la defense de los derechos fundamentales?” Serie Documentos de Trabajo, CIDE
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. Scott Mainwaring and Christopher Welna. New York: Oxford University Press.
Magaloni, Beatriz. 2008. “Enforcing Autocratic Political Order and the Role of Courts: The Case of Mexico.” In Rule by Law: The Politics of Courts in Authoritarian Regimes, eds. Ginsburg, Tom and Tamir Moustafa. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Malarino, Ezequiel. 2010. “Activismo judicial, punitivización y nacionalización. tendencias antidemocráticas y antiliberales de la Corte Interamericana De Derechos Humanos.” In Sistema Interamericano de Protección de los Derechos Humanos y Derecho Penal Internacional, ed. Kai Ambos. Montevideo: Fundación Konrad Adenauer.
Nelken, David. 2004. “Using the concept of legal culture,” in Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy, 29: 1-26.
Nunes, Rodrigo. 2010. “Ideational Origins of Progressive JudicialActivism: The Colombian Constitutional Court and the Right to Health,” in Latin American Politics and Society, 52 (3): 67–97.
Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal, Barry Ames, and Mitchell Seligson. 2006. “Strategies, Careers and Judicial Decisions: Lessons from the Bolivian Courts,” in Journal of Politics, 68(2): 284-295
Ríos Figueroa, Julio. 2007. “Fragmentation of Power and the Emergence of an Effective Judiciary in Mexico, 1994–2002.” Latin American Politics and Society 49 (1): 31–57.
Rodríguez Garavito, César. 2011. “Toward a Sociology of the Global Rule of Law Field: Neoliberalism, Neoconstitutionalism, and the Contest over Judicial Reform in Latin America.” In Lawyers and the Rule of Law in an Era of Globalization, eds. Yves Dezalay and Bryant Garth. New York: Routledge
Sánchez, Arianna, Beatriz Magaloni and Eric Magar. 2011. “Legalist versis Interpretativist: The Supreme Court and the Democratic Transition in Mexico.” In Courts in Latin America, ed. Gretchen Helmke and Julio Ríos Figueroa. New York: Cambridge University Press
Schauer, Frederick. 2008. “Formalism: Legal, Constitutional, Judicial.” In The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, ed. Keith Whittington, Daniel Kelemen, and Gregory Caldeira. New York: Oxford University Press.
Segal, Jeffrey, and Harold Spaeth. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Silva Meza, Juan, and Fernando Silva García. 2009. Derechos fundamentales: Bases para la reconstrucción de la jurisprudencia constitucional. Mexico: Porrúa.
Songer, Donald, and Susan Haire. 1992. “Integrating Alternative Approaches to the Study of Judicial Voting: Obscenity Cases in the U.S. Court of Appeal,” in American Journal of Political Science, 36: 963-982
Whittington, Keith. 2000. “Once More Unto the Breach: Post-Behavioralist Approaches to Judicial Politics,” in Law and Social Inquiry 25(2): 601-634
Whittington, Keith. 2008. “Constitutionalism.” In The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, ed. Keith E. Whittington, R. Daniel Kelemen, and Gregory A. Caldeira. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, Bruce, and Juan Carlos Rodríguez Cordero. 2006. “Legal Opportunity Structures and Social Movements The Effects of Institutional Change on Costa Rican Politics,” in Comparative Political Studies 39 (3): 325–351.
Publicado
2022-09-18
Sección
Notas de Investigación