La aplicación directa de la constitución.

Abstract

This work is summarized in verifying the type of constitutional control that the instance judges carry out in the administration of justice and if they, in the face of norms contrary to the Constitution, directly applying the Constitution, do not apply the norms directly without the need to consult the norm to the Constitutional Court, if they apply them because they are in force or if they are raised for consultation in case of doubt about constitutionality; that is to say, to establish what type of constitutional control they carry out before a norm contrary to the Constitution. This work has as its antecedent the pronouncements of the Constitutional Court in the sense that the trial judges are prohibited from directly not applying norms but should refer to the Constitutional Court for consultation; and, also the new pronouncements of the new Constitutional Court, in the line that the judges directly applying the Constitution if they can fail to apply infra constitutional norms that are considered contrary to the Constitution without the need to consult the Constitutional Court and only when there is doubt about the eventual unconstitutionality is raised for consultation with the Constitutional Court. These points undoubtedly cause legal insecurity because the judges would have contradictory decisions on how to proceed when deciding on the unconstitutionality of infra constitutional norms contrary to the Constitution, which results in legal insecurity and the importance of this thesis topic.