Desde inicios del siglo XX ha existido en el ordenamiento jurídico colombiano una teoría llamada “antiprocesalismo” según la cual el auto ilegal no puede atar el juez y, por tanto, dicha circunstancia le permite desconocer la providencia o revocarla. Actualmente no hay consenso sobre la forma en que debe aplicarse dicha teoría, si el juez puede desconocer las providencias erradas de oficio, por fuera del término de ejecutoria o cuando tengan carácter de sentencia. Sobre estos asuntos difiere la jurisprudencia de las altas cortes, incurriendo en lo que en la práctica jurídica se conoce como “Choque de Trenes”. Esta incertidumbre ha conducido a la aplicación irregular -y en ocasiones vulnerando el derecho al debido procesode esta teoría por los jueces de instancia. En todo caso, los pronunciamientos disponibles permiten vislumbrar algunos criterios, que se ofrecen en este...

Since the beginning of the 20th century the Colombian legal system has displayed a theory called ‘antiprocesalism’, according to which judges are not bound by their own decisions if they are so mistaken, so they can be considered as illegal. When this happens, judges can ignore those decisions. There is currently no consensus regarding the practical application of this theory, whether the judge can automatically ignore its own decisions, or whether the mistake must be pointed out by the parties. There is also discussion regarding when can those decisions be ignored related to their enforceability and if this theory can be applied to any type of judicial decision. This uncertainty has produced the irregular application of this theory, sometimes even damaging the right to due process, specially coming from lowercircuit judges. Still, current and ...

Since the beginning of the 20th century the Colombian legal system has displayed a theory called ‘antiprocesalism’, according to which judges are not bound by their own decisions if they are so mistaken, so they can be considered as illegal. When this happens, judges can ignore those decisions. There is currently no consensus regarding the practical application of this theory, whether the judge can automatically ignore its own decisions, or whether the mistake must be pointed out by the parties. There is also discussion regarding when can those decisions be ignored related to their enforceability and if this theory can be applied to any type of judicial decision. This uncertainty has produced the irregular application of this theory, sometimes even damaging the right to due process, specially coming from lowercircuit judges. Still, current and ...