Sistema Regional de Información
en línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina,
el Caribe, España y Portugal

Number 48's Index

In the constitutional reform of March 2019, the National Guard was transformed into a federal public security institution, of a civil nature, hierarchically attached to the direction and command of the Ministry of Public Security and Citizen Protection, however, in September 2022, a package of legal reforms was published, by which the operational and administrative control of the National Guard is transferred to the Secretary of National Defense, disturbing the structural model of civil command designed in the constitutional text, due to an excess of control institution by the armed forces.

Democracy and rule of law are complementary constitutional principles, not possible separately.   Constructive criticism of its shortcomings is acceptable, but the affirmation of its failure threatens the legitimacy of essential institutions for social coexistence. The academic approaches that confront democracy and the rule of law favor authoritarian reactions of an extremist nature, in a context of growing social polarization and risk of breakdown of democracy. Thus, jurists should provide solutions, and show courage and boldness in upholding core values. Also, should remember that Countermajority balances offset side effects of polarization. 

Resensión de: González Ordovás, María José. Derechos versus democracia. Ironía de la globalización. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 2022.

The article analyzes the evolution of the legal regulation of the right of unauthorized migrants to public health benefits. It considers the transition from a regime based on the idea of residence that allowed access to these benefits to one based on the idea of insu-rance that excluded it (between 2012 and 2018) and the return to the initial regime (since the 2018 counter-reform). At the same time, this regulation is used as a starting point to reflect on the universality and effectiveness of social rights.

This paper is concerned with the proof of discriminatory treatment in two dimen-sions: conceptual and epistemological. It is structured around two questions. First, what is the conceptual meaning of discriminatory treatment? To address questions of proof, one must be clear about its subject matter. Once this is achieved, it becomes clear how important it is to address a second question: How do we arrive at justified beliefs about the intentions and beliefs of others? I will explore two argumentative strategies for doing so, in an attempt to increase the clarity with which we understand the problem behind the last question, and also our ability to solve it.

It is undeniable that Artificial Intelligence is present in our daily life producing innumerable advantages in the whole society, although an indiscriminate use of AI entails risks that can directly affect the fundamental rights of individuals. This work aims to analyze the implications on the fundamental rights of citizens and the ethical principles that should prevail in the use AI, as well as the risks involved, being aware that we are facing a matter on which there is even more debate than positive law.