Responsibility of State for wrongful conviction

An approach to legal argumentation in two judicial decisions

Autores

  • Federico Urtubey Universidad Nacional de La Plata

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35295/sz.iisl/2003

Palavras-chave:

preventive detention, judicial decisions, Argentinian law, judicial discourse, responsibility of the State

Resumo

Within the legal system of Argentina, if an individual is confined by preventive detention before trial, it is possible to sue a judicial claim against the State if he or she can prove that such measure was unreasonably prolonged, or if it was illegitimate. This would be a case of jurisdictional responsibility of the State based on prolonged or illegitimate preventive imprisonment. The purpose of this article is to analyze two judicial decisions that resolve claims of this type, trying to shed some light on the argumentative construction developed by the judges when accepting or rejecting the lawsuits. This analysis allows access to the judges' perspectives on the State's jurisdictional activity, the role of criminal justice and the social background of the plaintiffs. The novelty of this approach lies in the fact that other studies on the topic of preventive detention emphasize issues of criminal policy or the functioning of the criminal justice system, while the focus here is on trials involving subsequent financial reparations. Thus, this perspective articulates the fields of legal sociology, law and Discourse Analysis studies.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Global Statistics ℹ️

Cumulative totals since publication
25
Views
16
Downloads
41
Total

Referências

Bourdieu, P., 2001. Poder, derecho y clases sociales. Bilbao: Descleé de Brouwer.

Cassagne, J.C., 2007. El sistema judicialista y la llamada judicialización de la actividad de la Administración. Revista Española de Derecho Administrativo, nº 133, p. 5 y ss.

Ferrajoli, L., 1994. El derecho como sistema de garantías. THEMIS: Revista de Derecho [en línea], nº 29, 119-130. Disponible en: https://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/themis/article/view/11466

Foucault, M., 2004. El orden del discurso. Buenos Aires: Tusquets.

García Pullés, F.R., 2016. La responsabilidad del estado en el contexto del nuevo código civil y comercial de la nación. Editorial de la Universidad Nacional de Buenos Aires.

Huff, R., Rattner, A., y Sagarin, E., 1996. Convicted but innocent. Wrongful conviction and public policy. Newbury Park: Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452220543

Legarre, S., y Rivera (h), J.C., 2009. La obligatoriedad atenuada de los fallos de la Corte Suprema y el stare decisis vertical. La Ley, 2009-E, 820.

Pardo, M.L., 1996. Derecho y Lingüística. Cómo se juzga con palabras. Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.

Pardo, M.L., 2011. Teoría y metodología de la investigación lingüística. Método sincrónico–diacrónico de análisis lingüístico de textos. Buenos Aires: Tersites.

Sacristán, E., 2015. ¿Jueces legisladores? Revista de Investigações Constitucionais [en línea], 2(2), Curitiba, 93–115. Disponible en: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/5340/534056246005.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v2i2.44512

Sozzo, M., 2007. ¿Metamorfosis de la prisión? Proyecto normalizador, populismo punitivo y “prisión-depósito” en Argentina. URVIO Revista Latinoamericana de Seguridad Ciudadana [en línea], 1(1), 88-116. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.17141/urvio.1.2007.1055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17141/urvio.1.2007.1055

Vasilachis de Gialdino, I., 1992. Métodos cualitativos. Los problemas teórico-epistemológicos. Buenos Aires: Centro Editor de América Latina.

Publicado

2025-04-30

Como Citar

Urtubey, F. (2025) “Responsibility of State for wrongful conviction: An approach to legal argumentation in two judicial decisions”, Sortuz: Oñati Journal of Emergent Socio-Legal Studies, 15(1), p. 124–140. doi: 10.35295/sz.iisl/2003.