El campo jurídico en Uruguay Autonomía, Poder Judicial y debate dogmático

Abstract

The objective of this presentation is to advance the understanding of the dynamics of the legal field in Uruguay. First, a brief introduction to the concept of legal field will be presented in this section. Below is a description of the general structure of the field between 1985 and the present. Then, four relevant characteristics of the Judiciary will be explored, understood as a subfield: the use of the budget as an element of pressure from the government, the characteristics of the judicial career, its use as an element of discipline within the organization, and the informal stratification between civil and no civil judges. This last point will allow us to connect with what seems to be the main debate in the contemporary legal field: the controversy between legal positivists and neoconstitutionalists. In the final comments, we will argue that the legal field has increased its internal differentiation since at least the end of the dictatorship. This differentiation can be linked to a dispersion of positions in dogmatic production. Going through this dispersion, the debate between legal positivists and neoconstitutionalists reflects the taking of positions around the main fault line of the field, the one that separates the dominant pole from the dominated pole, poles whose profiles are still diffuse. Neoconstitutionalism necessarily brings a greater opening of the field to the influences of currents of opinion, with effects that can be considered positive, but can have the unintended consequence of weakening judicial independence, and the legitimacy of the system.