RECONOCIMIENTO Y GARANTÍA DE «SUPERDERECHOS» EN CATALUÑA UNA PROPUESTA ALTERNATIVA TRAS LA STC 31/2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El artículo se compone de dos partes. La primera analiza detalladamente el fenómeno del reconocimiento y la garantía de derechos por parte de los estatutos de autonomía (denominados derechos estatutarios). El artículo es crítico con el reconocimiento de derechos por esta vía. Por lo que se refiere a las garantías de los derechos estatutarios, el trabajo se centra en los dictámenes vinculantes del Consejo de Garantías Estatutarias de Cataluña sobre proyectos y proposiciones de ley en materia de derechos. Estos dictámenes vinculantes fueron declarados inconstitucionales por la STC 31/2010. El artículo explora los motivos de dicha inconstitucionalidad. La segunda parte propone un sistema innovador de reconocimiento y garantía de «superderechos» en Cataluña respetuoso con esta jurisprudencia del TC. Dicha propuesta se inspira en el constitucionalismo débil británico y canadiense. Artikuluak bi zati ditu: Lehenengo zatian, autonomia-estatutuek eskubideak aitortzearen eta bermatzearen fenomenoa aztertzen da, zehatz mehatz (estatutu- eskubideak deituak). Artikulua kritikoa da eskubideak bide horretatik aitortzearekin. Estatutuetako eskubideen bermeei dagokienez, eskubideen arloko lege-proiektu eta -proposamenei buruz Kataluniako Estatutua Bermatzeko Kontseiluak emandako irizpen lotesleak hartzen ditu ardatz. Irizpen lotesle horiek konstituzioaren kontrakoak zirela deklaratu zuen Konstituzio Epaitegiak 31/2010 epaiaz. Artikuluan, konstituziokontrakotasun horren arrazoiak aztertzen dira. Bigarren zatian, Kataluniako «supereskubideak » aitortu eta bermatzeko sistema berritzaile bat proposatzen da, Konstituzio Auzitegiaren jurisprudentzia errespetatzen duena. Proposamen horrek Erresuma Batuko eta Kanadako konstituzionalismo ahula du inspirazio-iturri. This paper consists of two parts. T he first makes a detailed analysis of the phenomenon of the recognition and protection of rights by the statutes of autonomy (called statutory rights). The paper criticises the recognition of rights by this means. As regards the protection of those statutory rights, this paper focuses on the binding opinions of the Council of Statutory Guarantees of Catalonia on bills concerning those rights. These binding opinions were declared unconstitutional by the Judgment of the Spanish Constitutional Court 31/2010. The paper explores the reasons for this unconstitutionality. The second part proposes a new system of recognition and protection of «super-rights» in Catalonia that is respectful of this ruling of the Constitutional Court. Such proposal is inspired by British and Canadian weak constitutionalism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".