哥伦比亚和俄罗斯的替代性争端解决机制:调解和调解

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW Justicia Pub Date : 2021-10-06 DOI:10.17081/just.26.40.4773
Milton Arrieta López, Abel Meza Godoy, I. Afanasiev, V. Sekerin, Sara Noli
{"title":"哥伦比亚和俄罗斯的替代性争端解决机制:调解和调解","authors":"Milton Arrieta López, Abel Meza Godoy, I. Afanasiev, V. Sekerin, Sara Noli","doi":"10.17081/just.26.40.4773","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, the authors compare alternative conflict resolution mechanisms in Colombia and Russia. In the former, conciliation is the most developed alternative dispute resolution mechanism, while in the latter, mediation is the most developed. In order to deepen this comparison, a qualitative research of interpretative nature has been developed with the support of bibliographic-documentary material. The main conclusion is that access to justice is a human right that has been positivized as a fundamental right in the constitutions of both Colombia and Russia. However, the Colombian Constitution allows individuals to exercise their jurisdictional functions on a temporary basis, unlike the Russian Constitution, which only authorizes judges from the Federation to exercise their jurisdictional functions. While conciliation in Colombia is developed and implemented through State-supervised Conciliation and Arbitration Centers, mediation in Russia is in its initial phase and has gradually gained acceptance in society. In both states, the implementation of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms has been driven by the need to decongest the courts and tribunals of ordinary justice. Therefore, it is useful to insist on the massive use of these instruments to make possible a justice that comes from the parties in conflict, that can repair the relations of the subjects in dispute and that tends towards the construction of more peaceful societies.","PeriodicalId":41718,"journal":{"name":"Justicia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Colombia and Russia: Conciliation and Mediation\",\"authors\":\"Milton Arrieta López, Abel Meza Godoy, I. Afanasiev, V. Sekerin, Sara Noli\",\"doi\":\"10.17081/just.26.40.4773\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article, the authors compare alternative conflict resolution mechanisms in Colombia and Russia. In the former, conciliation is the most developed alternative dispute resolution mechanism, while in the latter, mediation is the most developed. In order to deepen this comparison, a qualitative research of interpretative nature has been developed with the support of bibliographic-documentary material. The main conclusion is that access to justice is a human right that has been positivized as a fundamental right in the constitutions of both Colombia and Russia. However, the Colombian Constitution allows individuals to exercise their jurisdictional functions on a temporary basis, unlike the Russian Constitution, which only authorizes judges from the Federation to exercise their jurisdictional functions. While conciliation in Colombia is developed and implemented through State-supervised Conciliation and Arbitration Centers, mediation in Russia is in its initial phase and has gradually gained acceptance in society. In both states, the implementation of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms has been driven by the need to decongest the courts and tribunals of ordinary justice. Therefore, it is useful to insist on the massive use of these instruments to make possible a justice that comes from the parties in conflict, that can repair the relations of the subjects in dispute and that tends towards the construction of more peaceful societies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41718,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Justicia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Justicia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17081/just.26.40.4773\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Justicia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17081/just.26.40.4773","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,作者比较了哥伦比亚和俄罗斯的替代性冲突解决机制。在前者中,调解是最发达的替代性纠纷解决机制,而在后者中,调解是最发达的。为了加深这种比较,在书目文献资料的支持下,开展了解释性质的研究。主要结论是,诉诸司法是一项人权,在哥伦比亚和俄罗斯两国的宪法中都作为一项基本权利得到了肯定。但是,《哥伦比亚宪法》允许个人在临时的基础上行使其司法职能,这与《俄罗斯宪法》不同,后者只授权联邦法官行使其司法职能。哥伦比亚的调解是通过国家监督的调解和仲裁中心发展和实施的,而俄罗斯的调解则处于起步阶段,并逐渐为社会所接受。在这两个国家,实施替代性争端解决机制是由于需要减少普通司法的法院和法庭的拥挤。因此,坚持大量使用这些工具,以使来自冲突各方的正义成为可能是有益的,这种正义能够修复争端主体之间的关系,并趋向于建设更和平的社会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Colombia and Russia: Conciliation and Mediation
In this article, the authors compare alternative conflict resolution mechanisms in Colombia and Russia. In the former, conciliation is the most developed alternative dispute resolution mechanism, while in the latter, mediation is the most developed. In order to deepen this comparison, a qualitative research of interpretative nature has been developed with the support of bibliographic-documentary material. The main conclusion is that access to justice is a human right that has been positivized as a fundamental right in the constitutions of both Colombia and Russia. However, the Colombian Constitution allows individuals to exercise their jurisdictional functions on a temporary basis, unlike the Russian Constitution, which only authorizes judges from the Federation to exercise their jurisdictional functions. While conciliation in Colombia is developed and implemented through State-supervised Conciliation and Arbitration Centers, mediation in Russia is in its initial phase and has gradually gained acceptance in society. In both states, the implementation of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms has been driven by the need to decongest the courts and tribunals of ordinary justice. Therefore, it is useful to insist on the massive use of these instruments to make possible a justice that comes from the parties in conflict, that can repair the relations of the subjects in dispute and that tends towards the construction of more peaceful societies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Justicia
Justicia LAW-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dilemas derivados del uso de sistemas autónomos de armas letales en el derecho internacional humanitario Percepciones contemporáneas en Chile a propósito del proceso migratorio reciente Nueva era del Control Fiscal Tributario con los documentos electrónicos en Colombia El Río La Plata como sujeto de derechos en Colombia: caracterización del conflicto ambiental que llevó a su reconocimiento Abogados y política: Análisis de la participación de estudios de abogados en la segunda vuelta de la campaña electoral peruana
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1