Colombia

Solapas principales

Caselaw

In 2002/2003, as the city of Bogota began the process of privatizing its waste collection services, recycling organizations in Bogota attempted to participate in a bidding process to compete for a waste collection and transportation contracts with the city. The recyclers were de jure precluded from competing for these contracts in big cities because they were not equity-owned, “share held corporations” as required by the law for public procurement, but rather, non-profit cooperatives of informal working poor.

In Bogota, recyclable materials have traditionally been collected and sold by individuals and families organized into recycling associations. Recyclers are among the poorest, most marginalized members of society.

Recycling activities in Colombia have traditionally been carried out by extremely poor and marginalized sectors of society, who collect materials from landfills or inorganic waste from the streets to transport and sell them as recyclable material to intermediary informal warehouses of the national and multinational industry from refuse deposited on the street and sell it to warehouses for modest sums.

The plaintiff filed an injunction aimed at guaranteeing the right of a 12 year-old girl to her mental health, among other rights. The girl became pregnant in early 2011 and started presenting symptoms of anxiety and depression, as diagnosed by different physicians, who recommended the interruption of her pregnancy.

La demandante interpuso una orden de interdicto o tutela dirigida a garantizar el derecho de una menor de 12 años a su salud mental, entre otros derechos. La menor quedó embarazada a principios de 2011 y empezó a presentar síntomas de ansiedad y depresión, según el diagnóstico de varios médicos que recomendaron la interrupción del embarazo.

La madre de una niña con discapacidad intelectual inició una acción de tutela luego de que su hija fuera diagnosticada con déficit cognitivo y microcefalia y no pudiera acceder al programa integral de terapias y educación especial encomendado, debido a la falta de recursos para cubrir dicho servicio.

The mother of an intellectually disabled girl initiated a tutela action because her daughter had been diagnosed with cognitive deficit and microcephaly, and she could not afford the recommended integrated program of therapy and special education. The Constitutional Court accepted to review the case and ordered EPS Coomeva to coordinate with local education agencies to obtain a comprehensive medical assessment of the minor, as well as to determine the medical and educational services required for her disability.

La  acción fue impulsada por una persona sordomuda que había cursado el primer semestre en la Institución Normal Superior del Municipio de Montería para obtener el título de Normalista Superior pero que le fue imposible continuar después del primer año debido a la aplicación de la ley que condiciona la asignación de traductores a las instituciones educativas a la presencia de mínimo 10 estudiantes en situación de discapacidad auditiva (Decreto 366/2009, Artículo 9 par. 3).

Complainant is hearing impaired and had completed the first semester in the Primary School Teacher's College at Montería, but was not able to continue on past the first year because based on the applicable law (paragraph 3, Art 9 of Decree 366/2009) established that a minimum presence of 10 students with hearing disabilities was necessary to require sign language interpreters in educational institutions.

Los demandantes interpusieron la acción de inconstitucionalidad porque consideraban que la Ley 115 de 1994 desobedecía los estándares del derecho internacional de los Derechos Humanos al contemplar la posibilidad de cobrar derechos académicos en la educación primaria (art. 183).