Jurisprudential precedent vs judicial autonomy: Departure from the precedent

Abstract

Over time, the judicial decisions adopted by the high courts of Colombia have been of great relevance. These decisions have helped with the development and construction of a social and constitutional state of law through the protection of fundamental rights, general principles of law, jurisprudence and, as an advance of this, the binding and mandatory judicial precedent in Colombia was established.
Consequently, and in accordance with political and social transformations, the law becomes dynamic and undergoes constant rethinking before of the speed of social events that bring legal consequences. This represents a challenge for the high courts, who have the task of setting a precedent. This precedent is understood as a general legal rule that can be applied as a guide or perspective to make decisions in subsequent cases, when there is identity between the factual grounds of the first and second case, and a correct application of the rule. This approach leads to highlighting in the current research topics such as: judicial precedent, judicial autonomy and proper argumentation, in order to show the impact they have on the legal world at the time of abide the decisions of the closing courts.