Scholarlink

<p>Located at the intersection of semiotic theory and legal anthropology, this article examines constitutional justice in Latin America as a semiotic and communicative praxis through which fundamental rights are pragmatically enacted. Distinguishing adjudication from the mere practice of doctrine, adjudication is understood as a translatory moment in which the court converts constitutional principles into operational meaning through legal language. Based on the analysis of emblematic cases and judicial documents, this study reveals three judicial semiotic strategies—definition, contextualization, and procedural anchoring—that inclusively contribute to the implementation of rights in vulnerability-prone conditions. Acknowledging the constraints imposed by the institutional and material circumstances of adjudication, the article argues that a semiotic framework enables a deeper understanding of the meaning-generating processes in adjudication through judicial communication at the praxis level. By examining judicial practice through the lens of semiotic theory, this research connects theory and practice while broadening the vision of constitutional justice as a dialogic activity, demonstrating that language not only reflects rights but also produces them.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Constitutional Justice as a Language of Rights: A Semiotic Approach to Human Rights Protection in Latin America

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月28日

查看全文
  • Henry Antonio Armijos Campoverde,
  • Diego Granja Zurita,
  • Walter Cuque Toapanta,
  • Hector F. Gomez A.

摘要

Located at the intersection of semiotic theory and legal anthropology, this article examines constitutional justice in Latin America as a semiotic and communicative praxis through which fundamental rights are pragmatically enacted. Distinguishing adjudication from the mere practice of doctrine, adjudication is understood as a translatory moment in which the court converts constitutional principles into operational meaning through legal language. Based on the analysis of emblematic cases and judicial documents, this study reveals three judicial semiotic strategies—definition, contextualization, and procedural anchoring—that inclusively contribute to the implementation of rights in vulnerability-prone conditions. Acknowledging the constraints imposed by the institutional and material circumstances of adjudication, the article argues that a semiotic framework enables a deeper understanding of the meaning-generating processes in adjudication through judicial communication at the praxis level. By examining judicial practice through the lens of semiotic theory, this research connects theory and practice while broadening the vision of constitutional justice as a dialogic activity, demonstrating that language not only reflects rights but also produces them.