Public Faith, Non-Contradiction and the Administration of Justice. 2026 Update.
When two public officials state opposite facts about the same procedural act, and the court rules without opening an evidentiary period or the challenge of falsity, what message does society receive?
That was one aspect of a real case:
🔹 the court notifier’s act certified a notification with all copies.
🔹 The court clerk reported the opposite, based on the return of the writ and the statements of the notified party, without giving any validity to what the notifier had reported.
🔹 The judge suspended the proceedings and rejected the challenge of falsity without processing it.
🔹 The case concluded by settlement, but the underlying question remains: how can we ensure that, when contradictions arise between officials, a clarification mechanism is activated?
I’ve updated the analysis on Proyecto WWW, incorporating the doctrine and the new CCCN.
Strengthening democracy requires accountable institutions and procedures that seek truth, not just the appearance of legality.
If you believe justice must be verifiable and transparent, share this post. 🙌
Read it here: 🔗 https://proyectowww-en.blogspot.com/2011/04/fe-publica-no-contradiccion-justicia.html
⚖️ #PublicFaith #DueProcess
Ver más
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para comprar un plan
Invitame un Cafecito