Confluences of the Legal Doctrine of the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court 2008-2018: Network Analysis
Keywords:
Social Network Analysis, Constitutional Courts, Jurisprudence, Mixed Methods Research, Legal Doctrine
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the patterns of interaction of the doctrine in the jurisprudence of the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court 2008-2018 using the methodology of social network analysis. The doctrine is the set of studies, criticism and analysis of a scientific nature carried out by jurists regarding the Law. In that order of things, the role of “what is read and cited” is vital to understand the epistemological context used in the interpretation of Law, especially scenarios in which constitutional canonical texts can be a value-centered interpretation. In this text, a review was carried out through the methodology of social network analysis, identifying central authors and accelerators of the flow of information, in order to find if there is a common “line of knowledge” used by the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court. It is concluded that a) there is a network of authors in the judgments of the Constitutional Court between the years 2008-2018; b) preponderance of certain main doctrinaires; and, c) a well-connected network of sentences that use doctrine as a tool to proceed, or to improve the quality of the obiter dicta, an element that constitutes a new space for legal analysis and monitoring of the decisions of the High Courts.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Adenitire, J. (2013). Between Institutional and Moral Discourse: On Alexy's Legal Philosophy. Jurisprudence, 4(2), pp. 358-364. En https://research.birmingham.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/between-institutional-and-moral-discourse-on-alexys-legal-philosophy(06b94441-df15-4284-bbe0-ceeaf5c2c478).html (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Aguiló, J. (2000). Teoría general de las fuentes del derecho: (y del orden jurídico). Barcelona, España: Ariel.
Aggarwal, C.C. (2011). An Introduction to Social Network Data Analytics. En https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-8462-3_1 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Álvarez, M. (2010). Introducción al derecho, 2ª ed. México: McGraw-Hill.
Anderlini, L., Felli, L. & Riboni, A. (2008). Statute Law or Case Law. LSE Research Online Documents on Economics. En http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/te/te528.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Araújo, E. B. & Benvindo, J. Z. (2014). O Intérprete diante do Texto: Aproximações entre a Leitura do Torá, do Corão e da Constituição (The Interpreter in Front of the Text: Approximations between the Reading of the Torah, the Qur'An and the Constitution). En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513338 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Ávila, R. (2016). El neoconstitucionalismo andino. Quito: Huaponi Ediciones.
Bonchi, F., Castillo, C., Gionis, A. & Jaimes, A. (2011). Social Network Analysis and Mining for Business Applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2(3). En http://chato.cl/papers/bonchi_castillo_gionis_jaimes_2011_social_network_analysis_business.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Botelho, C. S. (2016). O Papel Dos Princípios Na Interpretação Constitucional (The Role Played by the Principles of Constitutional Interpretation). En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2911561 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Poder, derecho y clases sociales. Bilbao: Desclée de Brouwer.
Bródka, P., Kazienko, P., Musial, K. & Skibicki, K. (2012). Analysis of Neighbourhoods in Multi-layered Dynamic Social Networks. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 5(3), pp. 582-596. En https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.4293 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Catenacci, J. (2001). Introducción al derecho. Buenos Aires: Astrea.
De la Guerra Zúñiga, E. (2013). Introducción al derecho: una explicación didáctica y completa sobre sus fuentes: el ¿por qué? y el ¿para qué? de la existencia del derecho. Quito: Corporación Editora Nacional.
Eblen, M., Fabsitz, R. R., Olson, J. L., Pearson, K., Pool, L. R., Puggal, M. (…) & Wagner, R. M. (2012). Social network analysis comparing researcher collaborations in two cardiovascular cohort studies. Research Evaluation, 21(5), pp. 392-405. En https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/21/5/392/1560257 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Emruli, S. (2018). General Reviews of the Independent Work of the Constitutional Courts. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 71, pp. 17-24. En https://iiste.org/journals/index.php/jlpg/article/view/41712 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Enders, C. (2010). The Right to have Rights: The concept of human dignity in German Basic Law. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, Hermenêutica e Teoria do Direito, 2(1), pp. 1-8. En http://revistas.unisinos.br/index.php/rechtd/article/view/4770 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Erétéo, G., Gandon, F., Corby, O. & Buffa, M. (2009). Semantic Social Network Analysis. arXiv: Artificial Intelligence. En https://arxiv.org/pdf/0904.3701 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Estupiñán, L., Gaitán, J., Herrera, O. & Pegoraro, L. (2014). La circulación de la doctrina en la jurisprudencia constitucional colombiana. Antecedentes, teorías y creación de un sistema de información web. Vniversitas Jurídica, v. 63(128), (pp. 43-78). https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.VJ128.cdjc (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Figueroa, G & Pegoraro, L. (2016). Las citas doctrinales en las sentencias de los tribunales constitucionales. Especial análisis de aquéllas incorporadas en los pronunciamientos de acción de inconstitucionalidad de la Suprema Corte de Justicia Mexicana. Boletín Mexicano de Derecho Comparado, XLIX(147), pp. 137-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iij.24484873e.2016.147.10642 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
García Máynez, E. (1974) Introducción al Estudio del Derecho. México: Porrúa.
Gajdoš, P., Ježowicz, T., Uher, V. & Dohnálek, P. (2016). A parallel Fruchterman–Reingold algorithm optimized for fast visualization of large graphs and swarms of data. Swarm and evolutionary computation, 26, pp. 56-63. En https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s2210650215000644 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Guerrero Salgado, E. (2015). Estructura institucional e intoxicación informativa: polarización política y derechos digitales en la República de Ecuador. Revista Teknokultura, 12(3), pp. 527-548.
Hutchens, M. J., Hmielowski, J. D. & Beam, M. A. (2019). Reinforcing spirals of political discussion and affective polarization. Communication Monographs, 302-321.
Jestaz, P. & Jamin, C. (2004). La doctrina. Santiago: Rubicón.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), pp. 112-133. En https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1558689806298224 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Kleinberg, J. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46(5), pp. 604–632.
Kolleck, N. (2013). Social network analysis in innovation research: using a mixed methods approach to analyze social innovations. European Journal of Futures Research, 1(1). En https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40309-013-0025-2 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Landa, D. & Lax, J. R. (2009). Legal Doctrine on Collegial Courts. The Journal of Politics, 71(3), pp. 946-963. En http://columbia.edu/~jrl2124/landa_lax_rules.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Lax, J. R. (2011). The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine. Annual Review of Political Science, 14(1), pp. 131-157. En https://annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.polisci.042108.134842 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
López Medina, D. (2002). El derecho de los jueces. Bogotá: Legis.
Mikkelsen, S. S., Tolstrup, J. S., Becker, U., Becker, U., Mortensen, E. L. & Flensborg-Madsen, T. (2015). Social network as predictor for onset of alcohol use disorder: A prospective cohort study. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 61, pp. 57-63. En https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s0010440x15000693 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Moore, S., Teixeira, A. & Stewart, S. (2014). Effect of Network Social Capital on the Chances of Smoking Relapse: A Two-Year Follow-up Study of Urban-Dwelling Adults. American Journal of Public Health, 104(12), pp. 72-76. En https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/ajph.2014.302239 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Montaña, J. (2012). Teoría utópica de las fuentes del derecho ecuatoriano: perspectiva comparada. Quito, Ecuador: Corte Constitucional para el Período de Transición.
Moreno, J. L., & Jennings, H. H. (1938). Statistics of social configurations. Sociometry, pp. 342-374.
Oyarte, R. (2015). Derecho Constitucional. Quito: CEP.
Ponzetto, G. A. & Fernandez, P. A. (2008). Case Law versus Statute Law: An Evolutionary Comparison. The Journal of Legal Studies, 37(2), pp. 379-430. En https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/533421?journalcode=jls (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Rice, E. & Yoshioka-Maxwell, A. (2015). Social Network Analysis as a Toolkit for the Science of Social Work. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(3), pp. 369-383.
Rodríguez Treviño, J. C. (2013). Cómo utilizar el Análisis de Redes Sociales para temas de historia. Signos históricos, 15(29), pp. 102-141.
Rodríguez, J. A. (1995). Análisis estructural y de redes. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS).
Ronchetti, F. (2006). La doctrina como fuente real del derecho. Cartapacio de Derecho, 11.
Rubin, E. L. & Feeley, M. M. (1996). CREATING LEGAL DOCTRINE. Southern California Law Review, 69. En https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3067ycontext=facpubs (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Rubinstein, D. & Sluis, K. (2013). Notes on the margins of metadata; concerning the undecidability of the digital image. Photographies, 6(1), 151-158.
Rutledge, T., Matthews, K., Lui, L.-y. L., Stone, K. L. & Cauley, J. A. (2003). Social networks and marital status predict mortality in older women: prospective evidence from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF). Psychosomatic Medicine, 65(4), 688-694. En https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12883123 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Saiman, C. N. (2008). Restitution and the Production of Legal Doctrine. Washington and Lee Law Review, 65(3). En http://law2.wlu.edu/deptimages/law review/65-3saimanpublished.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Spura, F. & Guerrero, E. (2015). Polarización política: análisis de la relación interpartidista en Twitter. Acercamiento al caso comparado España Ecuador. XII Congreso de AECPA Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (Universidad del País Vasco). San Sebastián.
Stark, D. & Vedres, B. (2006). Social Times of Network Spaces: Network Sequences and Foreign Investment in Hungary. American Journal of Sociology, 111(5), pp. 1367-1411. En https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/499507
Tiller, E. H. & Cross, F. B. (2005). What is Legal Doctrine. Northwestern University Law Review, 100(1), pp. 517-533. En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=730284 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zagrebelsky, G. (2011). El derecho dúctil: ley, derechos, justicia. 10a. Ed. Madrid: Trotta.
Zaphiris, P. & Pfeil, U. (2007). Introduction to social network analysis. En https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-03658-3_121.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Aguiló, J. (2000). Teoría general de las fuentes del derecho: (y del orden jurídico). Barcelona, España: Ariel.
Aggarwal, C.C. (2011). An Introduction to Social Network Data Analytics. En https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-8462-3_1 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Álvarez, M. (2010). Introducción al derecho, 2ª ed. México: McGraw-Hill.
Anderlini, L., Felli, L. & Riboni, A. (2008). Statute Law or Case Law. LSE Research Online Documents on Economics. En http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/te/te528.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Araújo, E. B. & Benvindo, J. Z. (2014). O Intérprete diante do Texto: Aproximações entre a Leitura do Torá, do Corão e da Constituição (The Interpreter in Front of the Text: Approximations between the Reading of the Torah, the Qur'An and the Constitution). En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2513338 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Ávila, R. (2016). El neoconstitucionalismo andino. Quito: Huaponi Ediciones.
Bonchi, F., Castillo, C., Gionis, A. & Jaimes, A. (2011). Social Network Analysis and Mining for Business Applications. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 2(3). En http://chato.cl/papers/bonchi_castillo_gionis_jaimes_2011_social_network_analysis_business.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Botelho, C. S. (2016). O Papel Dos Princípios Na Interpretação Constitucional (The Role Played by the Principles of Constitutional Interpretation). En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2911561 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Poder, derecho y clases sociales. Bilbao: Desclée de Brouwer.
Bródka, P., Kazienko, P., Musial, K. & Skibicki, K. (2012). Analysis of Neighbourhoods in Multi-layered Dynamic Social Networks. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 5(3), pp. 582-596. En https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.4293 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Catenacci, J. (2001). Introducción al derecho. Buenos Aires: Astrea.
De la Guerra Zúñiga, E. (2013). Introducción al derecho: una explicación didáctica y completa sobre sus fuentes: el ¿por qué? y el ¿para qué? de la existencia del derecho. Quito: Corporación Editora Nacional.
Eblen, M., Fabsitz, R. R., Olson, J. L., Pearson, K., Pool, L. R., Puggal, M. (…) & Wagner, R. M. (2012). Social network analysis comparing researcher collaborations in two cardiovascular cohort studies. Research Evaluation, 21(5), pp. 392-405. En https://academic.oup.com/rev/article/21/5/392/1560257 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Emruli, S. (2018). General Reviews of the Independent Work of the Constitutional Courts. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 71, pp. 17-24. En https://iiste.org/journals/index.php/jlpg/article/view/41712 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Enders, C. (2010). The Right to have Rights: The concept of human dignity in German Basic Law. Revista de Estudos Constitucionais, Hermenêutica e Teoria do Direito, 2(1), pp. 1-8. En http://revistas.unisinos.br/index.php/rechtd/article/view/4770 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Erétéo, G., Gandon, F., Corby, O. & Buffa, M. (2009). Semantic Social Network Analysis. arXiv: Artificial Intelligence. En https://arxiv.org/pdf/0904.3701 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Estupiñán, L., Gaitán, J., Herrera, O. & Pegoraro, L. (2014). La circulación de la doctrina en la jurisprudencia constitucional colombiana. Antecedentes, teorías y creación de un sistema de información web. Vniversitas Jurídica, v. 63(128), (pp. 43-78). https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.VJ128.cdjc (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Figueroa, G & Pegoraro, L. (2016). Las citas doctrinales en las sentencias de los tribunales constitucionales. Especial análisis de aquéllas incorporadas en los pronunciamientos de acción de inconstitucionalidad de la Suprema Corte de Justicia Mexicana. Boletín Mexicano de Derecho Comparado, XLIX(147), pp. 137-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iij.24484873e.2016.147.10642 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
García Máynez, E. (1974) Introducción al Estudio del Derecho. México: Porrúa.
Gajdoš, P., Ježowicz, T., Uher, V. & Dohnálek, P. (2016). A parallel Fruchterman–Reingold algorithm optimized for fast visualization of large graphs and swarms of data. Swarm and evolutionary computation, 26, pp. 56-63. En https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s2210650215000644 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Guerrero Salgado, E. (2015). Estructura institucional e intoxicación informativa: polarización política y derechos digitales en la República de Ecuador. Revista Teknokultura, 12(3), pp. 527-548.
Hutchens, M. J., Hmielowski, J. D. & Beam, M. A. (2019). Reinforcing spirals of political discussion and affective polarization. Communication Monographs, 302-321.
Jestaz, P. & Jamin, C. (2004). La doctrina. Santiago: Rubicón.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), pp. 112-133. En https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1558689806298224 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Kleinberg, J. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46(5), pp. 604–632.
Kolleck, N. (2013). Social network analysis in innovation research: using a mixed methods approach to analyze social innovations. European Journal of Futures Research, 1(1). En https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40309-013-0025-2 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Landa, D. & Lax, J. R. (2009). Legal Doctrine on Collegial Courts. The Journal of Politics, 71(3), pp. 946-963. En http://columbia.edu/~jrl2124/landa_lax_rules.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Lax, J. R. (2011). The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine. Annual Review of Political Science, 14(1), pp. 131-157. En https://annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.polisci.042108.134842 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
López Medina, D. (2002). El derecho de los jueces. Bogotá: Legis.
Mikkelsen, S. S., Tolstrup, J. S., Becker, U., Becker, U., Mortensen, E. L. & Flensborg-Madsen, T. (2015). Social network as predictor for onset of alcohol use disorder: A prospective cohort study. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 61, pp. 57-63. En https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s0010440x15000693 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Moore, S., Teixeira, A. & Stewart, S. (2014). Effect of Network Social Capital on the Chances of Smoking Relapse: A Two-Year Follow-up Study of Urban-Dwelling Adults. American Journal of Public Health, 104(12), pp. 72-76. En https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/ajph.2014.302239 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Montaña, J. (2012). Teoría utópica de las fuentes del derecho ecuatoriano: perspectiva comparada. Quito, Ecuador: Corte Constitucional para el Período de Transición.
Moreno, J. L., & Jennings, H. H. (1938). Statistics of social configurations. Sociometry, pp. 342-374.
Oyarte, R. (2015). Derecho Constitucional. Quito: CEP.
Ponzetto, G. A. & Fernandez, P. A. (2008). Case Law versus Statute Law: An Evolutionary Comparison. The Journal of Legal Studies, 37(2), pp. 379-430. En https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/533421?journalcode=jls (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Rice, E. & Yoshioka-Maxwell, A. (2015). Social Network Analysis as a Toolkit for the Science of Social Work. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(3), pp. 369-383.
Rodríguez Treviño, J. C. (2013). Cómo utilizar el Análisis de Redes Sociales para temas de historia. Signos históricos, 15(29), pp. 102-141.
Rodríguez, J. A. (1995). Análisis estructural y de redes. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS).
Ronchetti, F. (2006). La doctrina como fuente real del derecho. Cartapacio de Derecho, 11.
Rubin, E. L. & Feeley, M. M. (1996). CREATING LEGAL DOCTRINE. Southern California Law Review, 69. En https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3067ycontext=facpubs (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Rubinstein, D. & Sluis, K. (2013). Notes on the margins of metadata; concerning the undecidability of the digital image. Photographies, 6(1), 151-158.
Rutledge, T., Matthews, K., Lui, L.-y. L., Stone, K. L. & Cauley, J. A. (2003). Social networks and marital status predict mortality in older women: prospective evidence from the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures (SOF). Psychosomatic Medicine, 65(4), 688-694. En https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12883123 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Saiman, C. N. (2008). Restitution and the Production of Legal Doctrine. Washington and Lee Law Review, 65(3). En http://law2.wlu.edu/deptimages/law review/65-3saimanpublished.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Spura, F. & Guerrero, E. (2015). Polarización política: análisis de la relación interpartidista en Twitter. Acercamiento al caso comparado España Ecuador. XII Congreso de AECPA Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (Universidad del País Vasco). San Sebastián.
Stark, D. & Vedres, B. (2006). Social Times of Network Spaces: Network Sequences and Foreign Investment in Hungary. American Journal of Sociology, 111(5), pp. 1367-1411. En https://journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/499507
Tiller, E. H. & Cross, F. B. (2005). What is Legal Doctrine. Northwestern University Law Review, 100(1), pp. 517-533. En https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=730284 (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zagrebelsky, G. (2011). El derecho dúctil: ley, derechos, justicia. 10a. Ed. Madrid: Trotta.
Zaphiris, P. & Pfeil, U. (2007). Introduction to social network analysis. En https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-03658-3_121.pdf (último acceso 25-VIII-2019).
Published
2019-10-23
How to Cite
Guerrero Salgado, E., & Macías Quisaguano, J. (2019). Confluences of the Legal Doctrine of the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court 2008-2018: Network Analysis. Ius Humani. Law Journal, 8, 75-98. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31207/ih.v8i0.210
Issue
Section
Papers
Authors publishing in our Journal comply to the following terms:
1. Authors keep their work’s copyrights, but they guarantee Ius Humani Law Journal to be the first publisher of their papers. They grant the Journal will a Creative Commons Attribution License, under which their work can be shared with the condition that it is appropriately cited.
2. Authors are aware and accept that the Ius Humani Team will try to give the greatest diffusion to the Journal, which means, among other things, that its printed and electronic editions will be distributed among different databases and scientific indexes.
3. Authors can establish further clauses for non exclusive distribution, such as publication on a separate book or placing in an institutional data-base. Nevertheless, a note should be always added to explain that the paper was originally published in Ius Humani Law Journal.
4. We permit and encourage authors to share their work through Internet before and during the editorial process to receive further recommendations and wider references (we recommend you read the article The Effect of Open Access).
