"Diálogos judiciales y Autogobierno. Estudio socio-jurídico sobre un epifenómeno de la Justicia en Euskadi, en España y en Europa"
This study analyzes judicial dialogue, locating it in judicial governance studies and research on the Judiciary-. It proposes an innovative taxonomic typology of judicial dialogues.
The analysis begins with the system of self-government that characterizes Euskadi and Navarra, specifically, the absence of an autonomous Judicial Power, as a consequence of the Spanish constitutional model that consecrates Justice as a unitary power of a normatively decentralized State. To analyze the judicial dialogue, it is necessary to address justice from a constitutional and socio-legal governance perspective, where the social sciences complement the legal analysis, based on the institutional theory of law (MacCormick).
Part One, lays out the theoretical framework for a hermeneutic understanding of Justice —as a power and as an institution— and of the practice of judicial dialogue, which requires an epistemology that overcomes the dialectical tension between legal sociology and dogmatic theories of law. The rapprochement between sociology and legal theory uses a realist concept of law as an institutional normative order(ing), which addresses norms and conflicts within the realm of practical reason.
Open to Justice and to the theories of the Judiciary, as its institutional manifestation, this approach explains judicial dialogue as an epiphenomenon or side effect of Justice, as a power and as a field.
Having established the possibility of this socio-legal knowledge, Part Two, which applies the special methodology of socio-legal knowledge, presents the main features of Spanish Justice, namely the politicization of justice and the judicialization of politics, amongst other features. Once again, law, politics and justice are intertwined, as public forums of Practical Reason, something that reveals the difficult cases that are settled in the judicial vertices (apex), raising instances of judicial dialogue, of all sorts. The rich diversity of judicial dialogues calls for a systematic focus on the different categories of judicial dialogue in Spain and in Europe.
Part Three, the most innovative contribution of the monogrsph, addresses, from the theory and sociology of law, the problem of judicial dialogues, in difficult cases where politics, justice and law intersect, but which run, in the European Union and its Member States, in parallel to Basque self-government. It proposes a taxonomic classification based on seven categories and more than 15 types. Despite being intertwined, each of the parts has its autonomy.
