The discussion about whom and when rights are included in democracies, is an unresolved issue. Those who defend that the legislature should be the one guaranteeing these rights, argue on behalf of the popular origin of the parliament and the functions that the constitution grants; in the other side, the current detractors base their reviews on the fact that the legislature, by nature and origin, is linked to the public opinión which makes difficult for it to break off the trial of majorities, that sometimes goes against unrepresented minorities. Colombia, thanks to the judgment C-577 of 2011 -in which the Constitutional Court ruled on the constitutionality of two expressions of the marriage contract- renewed interest in the rights of LGBTI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transsexual/gender, and Intersexual) couples. While the Court recognized the discrimination hidden in the existence of an alternative way to shelter marital unions in this community, the problem is not solved, yet. Therefore, the Court called for the legislator to regúlate the matter in a two year term, by the establishment of an equivalent possibility for LGBTI couples; otherwise, these couples will be able to go before a notary or a judge to formalize their union by a solemn contract. This article presumes that the legislature is the one in charge of the inclusion of the lgbti community, and for this particular case, through the recognition of the right of these couples to join in marriage and form a family. In this sense, the aim of this paper is to demonstrate the elements that an inclusive legislation on the rights of lgbti people requires, claiming the figure of the Parliament and its role within the Colombian democratic system.
|Translated title of the contribution||Tensions between inclusive democracy and majority: marriage equality in the Colombian Congress|
|Journal||Revista de Derecho|
|State||Published - Dec 1 2014|