Constitutional Court overturns the law that created the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation

The Constitutional Court overthrew, this Thursday, March 4, the Law 1951 of 2019 by which the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation was created. Likewise, it gave the national government a deadline to resubmit the standard with the necessary adjustments.

The high court upheld a lawsuit that they filed from the Colombian Commission of Jurists and that it requested to declare the totality of that law unenforceable because it did not have the initiative of the Government and it did not have its endorsement; and because the plaintiffs allege that Congress failed to define the organic structure of the Ministry of Science and Technology.

While the entity is left without a legal floor, the Court made the reservation that it can continue to function normally while the Ministry can be re-created.

For the plaintiffs, the law is unconstitutional because the creation of ministries is the exclusive initiative of the Government, but the idea of ​​creating the Ministry of Sciences came from a proposal presented by Congressman Iván Darío Agudelo, without the government’s endorsement: “Consequently, above all the law a procedural defect is configured, so the rule must be withdrawn from the legal system”.

“Once the legislative process is closed and after an analysis of each of its stages, it is evident that the constitutional requirement of government initiative was obviated by the legislator, while the bill was not filed by the Government nor was it effectively assisted by any of the their representatives (Ministers or Directors of the Administrative Department), in light of the means presented by law and constitutional jurisprudence for that purpose. It should be noted that even within the process, specific mention was made of the sterility of the project without the consent of the executive and the process was concluded without it, ”says the lawsuit.

READ  Coworking gives space to the visual arts

On the other hand, the plaintiffs say, the objectives and structure of the ministry were never outlined in depth, as laws creating such institutions often do. In other words, the rule would constitute what is known as a “legislative omission”.

News in development …

Myrtle Frost

"Reader. Evil problem solver. Typical analyst. Unapologetic internet ninja."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top