INTERPRETACIÓN PROCESAL Y VALORACIÓN PROBATORIA EN LOS CASOS DE VIOLENCIA CONTRA LA MUJER EN LAS TUTELAS CONTRA PROVIDENCIAS JUDICIALES

ANÁLISIS JURISPRUDENCIAL DINÁMICO

Abstract

This document examines the stance of the Constitutional Court regarding the admissibility of writs of protection against judicial rulings in cases of violence against women. The study focuses on the assessment carried out by judges regarding the facts and evidence, emphasizing the complexity of this analysis and the need to respect constitutional rights. It highlights the initial tendency of judges to overlook the impact of regulations on the protection of women's rights, due to approaches based on impartiality and generality that do not consider the asymmetrical relationships in gender-based violence.

The research is conducted under a methodology of dynamic analysis of the jurisprudence of the Colombian Constitutional Court, addressing the specific grounds for admissibility of writs of protection against judicial rulings and the duty to interpret norms from a gender perspective. As a conclusion of the study, it is determined that the precedent established by the Colombian Constitutional Court since 2014 upholds the obligation of judges to apply a gender perspective in their judicial decisions, under penalty of incurring in specific grounds for admissibility of writs of protection against judicial rulings. In this regard, the importance of ensuring due process and the protection of victims of domestic violence is emphasized, with judicial officials serving as guarantors of these rights.