The unconstitutionality of non-unanimous verdicts in jury trials in Argentina
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of non-unanimous verdicts in jury trials in Argentina. To this end, it refutes, from an originalist and contextualist paradigm, the validation, by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Argentine Nation (CSJN), of the majority verdicts...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2024
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://revistas.ucu.edu.uy/index.php/revistadederecho/article/view/3909 https://hdl.handle.net/10895/7332 |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the unconstitutionality of non-unanimous verdicts in jury trials in Argentina. To this end, it refutes, from an originalist and contextualist paradigm, the validation, by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Argentine Nation (CSJN), of the majority verdicts in the judgment entitled: Canales, Mariano Eduardo y otro s/Homicidio Agravado - Impugnación Extraordinaria of May 2, 2019. To this end, a study is made of the arguments put forward by the CSJN to support its judgment. Likewise, the main national antecedents of trial by jury, the historical context in which it was adopted by the National Constitution of Argentina of the 1853 and the legal traditions that influenced its incorporation to the constitutional text are examined. |
|---|