Through Which The "commercial Cooperation Agreement Between The Government Of The Republic Of Colombia And The Government Of The Republic Of Turkey" Approved, Made And Signed In Ankara On May 17, 2006

Original Language Title: Por medio de la cual se aprueba el "Convenio de Cooperación Comercial entre el Gobierno de la República de Colombia y el Gobierno de la República de Turquía", hecho y firmado en Ankara el 17 de mayo de 2006

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$20 per month, or Get a Day Pass for only USD$4.99.
ACT 1345 2009
(July 31)
Official Journal No. 47.47805 of August 18, 2010 CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC

Through which the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement is approved between government of the Republic of Colombia and the government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006. Summary

Term Notes

THE CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC Having the text of the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, which literally says:
(to be transliterated: photocopy of the full texts of these international instruments is attached).

TRADE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY
Whereas, the Governments of the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of Turkey (hereinafter referred to as the "Contracting Parties ") on the basis of equality and mutual benefit,
Desiring to strengthen friendly relations and enhance cooperation between the two countries,
Recognizing that both countries are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and
considering their common interest in promoting trade and economic cooperation on a basis of mutual benefit,
have agreed as follows: Article I.
tRADE cOOPERATION.
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures within the framework of their respective laws and regulations to promote trade and economic cooperation between the two countries.

ARTICLE II. TREATMENT Most Favoured Nation (MFN).
The Contracting Parties shall give each other most favored nation treatment with respect to customs duties and other charges with respect to the import and export of goods between the two countries.
The provisions of this Article shall not apply to any present or future privilege or benefit granted to other countries within the framework of free trade areas, customs unions, other regional agreements and special agreements with developing countries and border trade.

ARTICLE III. Trade facilitation.
The Contracting Parties shall encourage their respective companies and organizations in the public and private sector to the extent possible take part in exhibitions, fairs and other promotional activities, and to promote the exchange of delegations and business representatives.
Each Contracting Party shall provide, to the extent possible, national exhibitions of the other party in its territory.
The implementation of agreed projects related to economic and trade cooperation within the framework of this Agreement, it shall be made on the basis of contracts or agreements to be signed between the companies, organizations or public entities interested in both countries, and will be subject the respective budgetary provisions.

ARTICLE IV. PAY MODE.
All payments for products and services exchanged between the two countries made in freely convertible currencies, in accordance with the laws and regulations in force in each country foreign exchange.

ARTICLE V. TEMPORARY ADMISSION.
In accordance with its internal legislation, the Contracting Parties agree to exempt from customs duties and taxes, goods and equipment temporarily imported for use in promotional events such as fairs, exhibitions, missions and seminars, provided such products and teams are not the subject of a commercial transaction.

ARTICLE VI. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.
The Contracting Parties, in order to improve and diversify bilateral trade and develop economic cooperation between the two countries, facilitate and accelerate the exchange of information, particularly with regard to their respective laws and programs in order to stimulate contacts between their companies and organizations involved in economic and trade cooperation.

ARTICLE VII. JOINT COMMITTEE.
The Contracting Parties shall establish a Joint Trade Committee chaired by Ministers or their delegates sufficiently high level, and will be composed of representatives of other ministries and corporations in both countries when deemed necessary. The Committee will monitor compliance with this Agreement and make the necessary proposals in order to stimulate and develop trade and mediate with any difficulties that may arise in this endeavor. The Committee shall meet alternately in each country at the time deemed necessary.

The Committee may, if deemed appropriate, establish subcommittees and ask experts and advisers to attend meetings of the Committee. The subcommittees will report their activities to the Committee.

ARTICLE VIII. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS.
The cooperation between the Contracting Parties within the framework of this Agreement shall be in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations in their respective countries and will be consistent with their international obligations.

ARTICLE IX. CONFLICT RESOLUTION.
Disputes arising between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation or implementation of this Agreement shall be resolved without unreasonable delay, by friendly consultations and negotiations.

ARTICLE X. AMENDMENTS.
Either Contracting Party may propose modifications or amendments to this Convention after its entry into force. The adoption of these amendments will be made by written notice and by mutual agreement between the Parties. Amendments shall enter into force thirty (30) days after the parties have formally notified through diplomatic notes compliance with the internal legal requirements for the entry into force of these.

ARTICLE XI. VALIDITY.
The Parties shall be notified through diplomatic notes compliance with the internal legal requirements for the entry into force of this Convention. The Convention will enter into force on the date on which receipt of the second of these notifications by which the Contracting Parties officially notify each other that their respective ratification procedures have been completed.
This Agreement shall remain in force for a period of five (5) years and thereafter, its effect will be automatically renewed for successive periods of one (1) year unless either Contracting Party gives written notice of termination six (6) months in advance.
After the termination of this Agreement, its provisions and the provisions of any protocol, contract or separate agreement concluded in this respect will continue to govern obligations or existing, taken or initiated after the same projects and unexpired. Such obligations or projects will be carried out to completion.
The undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective Governments, have signed this Agreement.
Done and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006 in three copies in Spanish, Turkish and English, being equally authentic. In case of discrepancies regarding the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention, the English text will take precedence.
For the Government of the Republic of Colombia,
CAROLINA BARCO,
Minister of Foreign Affairs.
For the Government of the Republic of Turkey, Abdullah Gul
,
Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. RAMA

PUBLIC POWER EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
Bogota, DC, October 10, 2007
authorized. Submit for consideration by the honorable Congress for constitutional purposes.
(Sgd.)
The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister,
(Sgd.) Fernando Araújo Perdomo.
DECREES: Article 1.
. Approval of the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2o. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
Given in Bogotá, DC, honorable ... Presented to Congress by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs Jaime Bermudez
.
The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata Paez
. RAMA

PUBLIC POWER EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
Bogota, DC, October 10, 2007
authorized. Submit for consideration by the honorable Congress for constitutional purposes.
(Sgd.)
The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister,
(Sgd.) Fernando Araújo Perdomo.
DECREES: Article 1.
. Approval of the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2.
. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
The President of the honorable Senate,
Hernán Andrade Francisco Serrano.
REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA - NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
transmittal and enforcement.
Run, after review by the Constitutional Court, pursuant to Article 241-10 of the Constitution.
Given in Bogotá, DC, on July 31, 2009.

The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister, Jaime Bermudez
.
The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata Paez
. RAMA

PUBLIC POWER EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
Bogota, DC, October 10, 2007
authorized. Submit for consideration by the honorable Congress for constitutional purposes.
(Sgd.)
The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister,
(Sgd.) Jaime Bermudez.
DECREES: Article 1.
. Approval of the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2o. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
The President of the honorable Senate, Javier Caceres Leal
.
The Secretary General of the honorable Senate, Emilio Otero
Dajud. LAW
1345
through which the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey" is approved, made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006 .
in accordance with the provisions of Order number 053 dated March 10, 2010 - Record LAT-351, of the Plenary Chamber of the Constitutional Court, which in its relevant part said:
"(...)
"Then the President of the Republic shall have the period specified in the Charter to sanction the bill (maintaining the same numbering of the law approving that is returned)," the date is sanctioned here law 1345 31 July 2009, by which the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006 approved, retaining its number and initial dates.
Republic of Colombia - National Government
published and enforced.
Run, after review by the Constitutional Court, pursuant to Article 241-10 of the Constitution.
Given in Bogotá DC, on August 18, 2010.

CALDERON JUAN MANUEL SANTOS Minister of Foreign Affairs Maria Angela Holguin Cuellar
.
The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Sergio Diaz Granados Guida
. Constitutional Court


General Secretariat Office No. OPC-123/10
Bogotá DC, sixteen (16) April two thousand ten (2010). Doctor


PILAR RODRIGUEZ ARIAS Second Constitutional Commission Secretary Permanent


City House of Representatives
Reference: LAT-351 File number. Law 1345 of July 31, 2009 by which the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey" is approved, made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006 .
Note: When replying please quote the file number, office and magistrate. Respected Dr.
:
politely and in order to comply with the provisions of the honorable Judge Dr. Maria Victoria Street Correa, in car number 53 Plenary Chamber of ten (10) March 2010, carefully let me tell you ordered the provided back described, the relevant part then transcribe:
"(...)
Second. Treat yourself to the Second Standing Committee Constitutional Chamber of Representatives within 30 days from the date of notification of this order to the Presidency of the same, to remedy the defect detected in this decision.

Third. Once corrected the defect that the preamble of this decision referred to the House of Representatives have until June 20, 2010, to meet the later stages of the legislative process. Then the President of the Republic shall have the period specified in the Charter to sanction the bill.
Room. Completed the previous procedure, the President of Congress sent to the Court Act 1345 of 2009, for a final decision on its constitutionality. "
Sincerely, Victoria Sáchica
Martha Mendez, Secretary General
. Annex
Auto copy number 53 of 2010 on 34 pages.

Constitutional Court Plenum NUMBER AUTO

053 2010 Reference: LAT-351
Record Law Review 1345 31 July 2009 "through which passes the commercial cooperation agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Judge Speaker: Dr. Maria Victoria Street Correa.
Bogota, ten (10) March two thousand and ten (2010)
The Plenum of the Constitutional Court, pursuant to its constitutional powers and the requirements and procedures established in Decree 2067 of 1991, it has issued the following, AUTO

in the process of constitutional revision of Law 1345 of July 31, 2009, "through which the agreement is approved trade cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006. I
. BACKGROUND
Based on the provisions of Article 241-10 of the Constitution, filed by the General Secretariat of the Corporation on August 11, 2009 office, the Legal Secretary of the Presidency of the Republic sent a certified copy of 1345 Law 2009 of July 31, 2009, for purposes of constitutional review.
The Substantiating Justice, by order of 3 September 2009, he started the study of the process and ordered that evidence. Following receipt of these, ordered to continue processing the same and, therefore, set to list the process for a period of 10 days in order to allow citizen involvement and to transfer to the Attorney General's Office for the corresponding concept and communicating the initiation of the process to the President of the Republic, the President of the Congress of the Republic and the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
The formalities provided for in Decree 2067 of 1991, comes this Court to decide on the constitutionality of the treaty and the law that approves.
II. TEXT OF THE CONVENTION IS REVIEWED AND ITS Law Approving
The text of the law is transcribed sent for review, as its publication in the Official Journal Year CXLIV. N. 47427. 31 July, 2009. p. 52.
"Law 1345 of 2009
(July 31)
through which the approved" Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
tHE CONGRESS oF tHE REPUBLIC
having regard to the text of the" Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006, which reads:
(to be transliterated: photocopy of the full text of that instrument is attached) .
TRADE COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY
Whereas, the Governments of the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of Turkey (hereinafter referred to as the "Contracting Parties ") on the basis of equality and mutual benefit,
Desiring to strengthen friendly relations and enhance cooperation between the two countries,
Recognizing that both countries are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and
considering their common interest in promoting trade and economic cooperation on a basis of mutual benefit,
have agreed as follows: Article I.
tRADE cOOPERATION.
The Contracting Parties shall take all appropriate measures within the framework of their respective laws and regulations to promote trade and economic cooperation between the two countries.
ARTICLE II. TREATMENT Most Favoured Nation (MFN).
The Contracting Parties shall give each other most favored nation treatment with respect to customs duties and other charges with respect to the import and export of goods between the two countries.

The provisions of this Article shall not apply to any present or future privilege or benefit granted to other countries within the framework of free trade areas, customs unions, other regional agreements and special agreements with developing countries and border trade.
ARTICLE III. Trade facilitation.
The Contracting Parties shall encourage their respective companies and organizations in the public and private sector to the extent possible take part in exhibitions, fairs and other promotional activities, and to promote the exchange of delegations and business representatives.
Each Contracting Party shall provide, to the extent possible, national exhibitions of the other party in its territory.
The implementation of agreed projects related to economic and trade cooperation within the framework of this Agreement, it shall be made on the basis of contracts or agreements to be signed between the companies, organizations or public entities interested in both countries, and will be subject the respective budgetary provisions.
ARTICLE IV. PAY MODE.
All payments for products and services exchanged between the two countries made in freely convertible currencies, in accordance with the laws and regulations in force in each country foreign exchange.
ARTICLE V. TEMPORARY ADMISSION.
In accordance with its internal legislation, the Contracting Parties agree to exempt from customs duties and taxes, goods and equipment temporarily imported for use in promotional events such as fairs, exhibitions, missions and seminars, provided such products and teams are not the subject of a commercial transaction.
ARTICLE VI. DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION.
The Contracting Parties, in order to improve and diversify bilateral trade and develop economic cooperation between the two countries, facilitate and accelerate the exchange of information, particularly with regard to their respective laws and programs in order to stimulate contacts between their companies and organizations involved in economic and trade cooperation.
ARTICLE VII. JOINT COMMITTEE.
The Contracting Parties shall establish a Joint Trade Committee chaired by Ministers or their delegates sufficiently high level, and will be composed of representatives of other ministries and corporations in both countries when deemed necessary. The Committee will monitor compliance with this Agreement and make the necessary proposals in order to stimulate and develop trade and mediate with any difficulties that may arise in this endeavor. The Committee shall meet alternately in each country at the time deemed necessary.
The Committee may, if deemed appropriate, establish subcommittees and ask experts and advisers to attend meetings of the Committee. The subcommittees will report their activities to the Committee.
ARTICLE VIII. COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS.
The cooperation between the Contracting Parties within the framework of this Agreement shall be in accordance with the laws, rules and regulations in their respective countries and will be consistent with their international obligations.
ARTICLE IX. CONFLICT RESOLUTION.
Disputes arising between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation or implementation of this Agreement shall be resolved without unreasonable delay, by friendly consultations and negotiations.
ARTICLE X. AMENDMENTS.
Either Contracting Party may propose modifications or amendments to this Convention after its entry into force. The adoption of these amendments will be made by written notice and by mutual agreement between the Parties. Amendments shall enter into force thirty (30) days after the parties have formally notified through diplomatic notes compliance with the internal legal requirements for the entry into force of these.
ARTICLE XI. VALIDITY.
The Parties shall be notified through diplomatic notes compliance with the internal legal requirements for the entry into force of this Convention. The Convention will enter into force on the date on which receipt of the second of these notifications by which the Contracting Parties officially notify each other that their respective ratification procedures have been completed.
This Agreement shall remain in force for a period of five (5) years and thereafter, its effect will be automatically renewed for successive periods of one (1) year unless either Contracting Party gives written notice of termination six (6) months in advance.

After the termination of this Agreement, its provisions and the provisions of any protocol, contract or separate agreement concluded in this respect will continue to govern obligations or existing, taken or initiated after the same projects and unexpired. Such obligations or projects will be carried out to completion.
The undersigned, being duly authorized by their respective Governments, have signed this Agreement.
Done and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006 in three copies in Spanish, Turkish and English, being equally authentic. In case of discrepancies regarding the interpretation of the provisions of the Convention, the English text will take precedence.
For the Government of the Republic of Colombia,
CAROLINA BARCO,
Minister of Foreign Affairs.
For the Government of the Republic of Turkey, Abdullah Gul
,
Foreign Minister and Deputy Prime Minister. RAMA

PUBLIC POWER EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
Bogota, DC, October 10, 2007
authorized. Submit for consideration by the honorable Congress for constitutional purposes.
(Sgd.)
The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister,
(Sgd.) Fernando Araújo Perdomo.
DECREES: Article 1.
. Approval of the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2o. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
Given in Bogotá, DC, honorable ... Presented to Congress by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs Jaime Bermudez
.
The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata Paez
. RAMA

PUBLIC POWER EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
Bogota, DC, October 10, 2007
authorized. Submit for consideration by the honorable Congress for constitutional purposes.
(Sgd.)
The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister,
(Sgd.) Fernando Araújo Perdomo.
DECREES: Article 1.
. Approval of the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2o. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
The President of the honorable Senate,
Hernán Andrade Francisco Serrano.
The Secretary General of the honorable Senate, Ramon Emilio Otero
Dajud.
The President of the honorable Chamber of Representatives, Germán
Male Cotrino.
The Secretary General of the honorable House of Representatives, Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez
Camargo.
REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA - NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
transmittal and enforcement.
Run, after review by the Constitutional Court, pursuant to Article 241-10 of the Constitution.
Given in Bogotá, DC, on July 31, 2009.

The Alvaro Uribe Foreign Minister, Jaime Bermudez
.
The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism ".
III. STATEMENT BY THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
In a letter to the Corporation on December 14, 2009, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, asked the Court to declare the constitutionality of the law approving that convention and, for performing the following considerations.

First, it indicates that in terms of formal requirements regarding the subscription and legislative approval these were fulfilled to this agreement have been concluded and signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the time, Dr. Carolina Barco Isakson, person ideal, with capacity to bind and engage the state and fulfill all the requirements for the processing of a law. Thus, he states that compliance with the provisions of Articles 9, 150, paragraph 16, 226 and 227 and none of these provisions are antagonized.
Second, he said that the signing of this Agreement implements Article 277 of the Constitution, it encourages trade and economic cooperation between signatory states, and promotes the internationalization of international economic relations and integration of states over basis of equality, reciprocity and national interest.
Colombia highlights that the business relationship that emerges from this treaty will allow the entry of Colombian products and markets of Southeast Europe, Russia and Middle East services and that the Turkish market is of great importance for Colombian products, it is special for thermal coals.
Third, states that the agreement was agreed respecting the principles of national sovereignty, self-determination and non-intervention in internal affairs and recognizes that develops fully the principles of international law accepted by Colombia indicating that cooperative relations arising from this treaty they should be developed with respect for the internal of each of the parties and without violating other obligations assumed internationally standards.
IV. ATTORNEY GENERAL CONCEPT OF THE NATION
The Attorney General's Office (E), Martha Isabel Castañeda Curvelo, gave the concept number 4896, official letter of February 2, 2010, in which she asked the Constitutional Court to declare the constitutionality of the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, agreed and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006 and Law 1345 of 2010, approving that treaty. The reasons for their application are summarized below.
As for the legislative process Attorney she says Vista began in the Senate, as mandated by Article 157 of the Charter, to be filed at the Registry of the Senate on July 20, 2008 . he stated that it complied with the provisions of Article 160 regarding the terms to be observed between the first and second debate between project approval in the Senate and the initiation of debate in the House of Representatives the decision-making quorum attended Article 146 stipulated in the Constitution and discussions and approvals by the second permanent constitutional Commissions Plenary of the Senate and House of Representatives were given, following the provisions of Article 160 of the Constitution. It also indicates that not having been considered the project in more than two terms were complied with Article 162 and Article 241, paragraph 10 having been sent the law to the Constitutional Court within a period of 6 days after presidential approval. Therefore it claims that the 1345 Act is constitutional 2009 from the formal point of view.
As for its material content, the Attorney said that full development is given to article 2 of the Charter in this agreement, whatever that cooperation arising from this agreement contributes to the pursuit of general prosperity, by strengthening economic and trade relations of the state.
Considers that the treaty is compatible with establishing the preamble and Articles 9, 226 and 227 since foreign policy seeks integration and promoting internationalization in economic relations in the country. It also highlights that the best interests of the state were being raised safeguarded the agreement within a framework of reciprocity, national interest and respecting national sovereignty, as noted by article 9 of the Constitution. For these reasons it conceptualizes the agreement on constitutional review is also from a material point of view.
V. The Court's
1. Competence of the Constitutional Court in respect of treaties and laws approving treaties

1.1. In accordance with the provisions of Article 241, paragraph 10 of the Constitution, for the Court reviewing the constitutionality of international treaties and laws approving them. According to the Judgment C-468 of 1997, [1] such control is characterized by (i) prior to the improvement of the treaty, but after approval of Congress and government sanction; (Ii) automatic, it must be sent directly by the President of the Republic to the Constitutional Court within the government sanction six days; (Iii) integral to the extent that the Court must analyze both the formal aspects and materials law and treaty, confronting them with all the constitutional text; (Iv) has force of res judicata; (V) it is a sine qua non for ratification of the relevant agreement; and (vi) a preventive function, [2] because its purpose is to guarantee the supremacy of the Constitution and the compliance with international commitments of the Colombian state.
1.2. As to control procedural defects that the Court exercises over international treaties and laws that passed, as prescribed in Article 241, paragraph 10 superior, this is addressed both to examine the validity of the representation of the Colombian State in the negotiation and conclusion of instrument and competence of officials in the negotiation and signing of the treaty, as compliance with the rules of legislative process in the formation of the law passing through Congress.
1.3. Given the special nature of the acts ratifying public treaties, the legislature can not alter the content of these introducing new clauses because its function is to approve or disapprove the whole treaty. [3] If the treaty is multi lateral, it is possible to make interpretative declarations and, unless expressly prohibited, reservations can also be introduced which do not affect the object and purpose of the treaty. [4]
1.4. As for the substantive examination, this is to judge the provisions of the text of the international treaty is reviewed and his passing law in respect of all of the provisions of the Higher Planning to determine if the first fit or not to Political constitution.
1.5. This examination is purely legal background and therefore does not understand issues of convenience, timeliness, usefulness and efficiency, as highlighted by the Court. [5]
Defined the scope of judicial review, the Court now turns to examine the law approving the agreement and reference.
2. The formal review of Act 1345 of 2009
2.1. Referral of the law approving
The Legal Secretary of the Presidency of the Republic sent to this Corporation for constitutional control in accordance with Article 241, paragraph 10 of the Constitution on August 11, 2009 the Law 1345 of 2009, Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey "" through which the approved ", made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006 signed by President 31 July 2009, such shipment was made within a period of six days provided for in section 10 of article 241 of the Constitution.
2.2. Negotiation and conclusion of the Treaty
The Constitutional Court has consistently held that the constitutional stated duty to review international treaties and the laws approving includes the examination of the powers of the Executive regarding the negotiation and signing of the instrument respective international. On this point, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, by letter of 18 September 2009, he said the agreement was signed by Carolina Barco Isakson, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the time, who dispensed with full powers, under Article on the 7th of the Vienna Convention on the law of treaties indicating that to express the consent of the State to be bound by a treaty, be deemed represented the same whether it follows from the practice followed by the States concerned, that the intention of these was to consider that person state representative for this purpose.
2.3. Presidential approval
The July 31, 2009, the President of the Republic gave its executive to Law 1345 of 2009 approval, "through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia is approved and the Government of the Republic of Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.

Similarly, he ordered to submit the approval of this international instrument to Congress. To this end, the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Industry and Tourism, presented to Congress that Convention.
2.4. Step made in the Congress for the formation of Law 1345 of 2009
Unless the requirement to begin the process of draft laws approving international treaties in the Senate, the Constitution does not specify a procedure special to issue such laws, so it is up to these training process planned for ordinary laws, governed by articles 157, 158, 160 and 165 of the Charter, among others.
According to the documents in the file, the Bill Senate 2008 09 252 2008 House, exhausted the next pending in Congress.
2.4.1. The processing of Bill 009, 2008 Senate in the Second Standing Committee of the Senate Constitutional Bill
The 09 Senate 2008 was presented on October 10, 2007 to the Secretary of the Senate of the Republic by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs Jaime Bermudez, Trade, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata Paez. The original text along with the respective explanatory memorandum were published in the Gazette of the Congress of the Republic number 461, 2008. [6]
The paper corresponded to the Senators Cecilia López Montaño, Carlos Emiro Barriga Penaranda, Jesus Enrique Piñacué Achicué, Alexandra Moreno Piraquive, Luzelena Restrepo Betancur, Mario Male Olarte, Marta Lucia Ramirez de Rincon and Nancy Patricia Gutiérrez Castañeda and was published in the Congress Gazette number 626 of September 11, 2008. [7] In this paper it is proposed to give the first debate to this project.
In order to comply with the 1st paragraph of Rule 156, delivery was made to the Senators copy of the Gazette No. 626 of 2008, the September 11, 2008, where the paper is published the first debate .
The Bill 009 of 2008 Senate was previously announced on September 16, 2008, to be discussed and voted in the first debate at the next session. [8] The prior notice required by article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 did the Secretary of the Second Committee of the Senate of the Republic, on instructions from the President of the Second Joint Committees, as follows:
"CONSTUTUCIONAL SECOND COMMITTEE STANDING COMMITTEE SECOND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FOREIGN TRADE AND NATIONAL DEFENSE tHE HONORABLE SENATE oF REPUBLIC ACT
2008
NUMBER 10 (September 16) "V

" on instructions from the President of the Second Commission Senate, announcement discussion and voting on bills for the next session. (Article 8 of the legislative act number 01, 2003).
(...)
4. Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, "Through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey is approved."
Authors: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Finance and of Commerce, Industry and Tourism.
Speakers: Cecilia López Montaño, Carlos Emiro Barriga Penaranda, Jesus Enrique Piñacué Achicué, Alexandra Moreno Piraquive, Luzelena Restrepo Betancur, Mario Male Olarte, Marta Lucia Ramirez and Nancy Patricia Gutiérrez.
Publications: Congress Gazette number 461 2008.
Paper for debate first Gazette number 626
Congress 2008. (...)
"These bills would be found in the Order Day to announce for the next session, Mr. President. "
Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez Arroyave President.
Thank you, then those are the projects announced for the next session, which in principle (sic) tomorrow, Wednesday, September 17 from (sic) 10 am ".
On September 17, 2008, the Second Committee of the Senate held debate and vote on the draft in the following terms, as stated in the Congress Gazette number 331 of May 19, 2009: [9]
"SECOND CONSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE PERMANENT INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, FOREIGN TRADE aND NATIONAL DEFENSE OF THE REPUBLIC HONORABLE SENATE RECORD NUMBER

11, 2008 (September 17)
(...)

V" Discussion and voting on bills announced in previous session
(...)
4. Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006 is approved.
(...)

Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez President: up new opportunity this project remains postponed, please uphold the Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, the Agreement with the Republic of Turkey. Senator spoke
Ponente, Cecilia López Montaño (...)
(...)
Take the word Senator Marta Lucía Ramírez de Rincón: I make part of the Commission of speakers, we all agree in the paper presented Senator Cecilia López, I do want to ask Dr. Camargo, what strategy you plan the Chancellery in diplomatic matters. Why when we saw the work for this paper, it seemed exotic to Colombia manages its relations with Turkey since an embassy in Vienna, which has nothing to do from the point of geographical, economic Culturally, it has nothing to do Vienna with Turkey and Turkey in Colombia from Caracas that is increasingly distant and different from what is Colombia.
(...)
Responds Dr. Oscar Camargo, Ministry of Foreign Trade (...)
Mr. President, Manuel Ramiro Velasquez, says: Thank you, what we want is bound to debate plenary, the Ministry of Trade and Foreign Affairs, which for the commission of speakers bound to the plenary, these concerns are acquitted. Finished with the proposition points and ending the presentation.
Mr. Secretary Felipe Ortiz, read the paper report:
end Proposition
For the foregoing and based on the provisions of the Constitution and the law, we hereby propose to the honorable Senators the Second Committee to first debate the bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the Agreement on trade cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed approved in Ankara, 17 May 2006. of the honorable Senators, signed: Carlos Emiro Barriga Penaranda, Alexandra Moreno Piraquive, Cecilia López Montaño, Jesus Enrique Piñacué Achicué, Luzelena Restrepo Betancur, Marta Lucia Ramirez de Rincon, Nancy Patricia Gutiérrez Castañeda and Mario male Olarte.
Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez Arroyave President: Submits for consideration of Senators proposing ending the report of the Commission of speakers. What approves the Commission?
Mr. Secretary Felipe Ortiz: He informed the Presidency that has been approved by the Senate of the Commission, the final report of the paper.
Articulate the project.
The Secretary read the articles:
Article 1o. To approve the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Article 2o. In accordance with the provisions of article 1 of Law 7 of 1944, the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey", made and signed in Ankara on May 17 2006, that article 1 of this law is passed, will force the country from the date the international link is perfect therefrom.
Article 3o. This law applies from the date of publication.
This is the text signed by the speakers Senators.
Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez Arroyave President:
submitted for consideration of Senators read the articles. Approved by the Commission.
Mr. Secretary Felipe Ortiz:
He informed the Presidency that has been approved by the Senate of the Second Committee read the articles of the draft.
Project Title.
The Secretary read the title of the project, through which the "Convention trade cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey" is approved, made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez Arroyave President:
Senators Inform the Commission, which is considered the project title. Does the Commission approves?
The Secretary:
He informed the Presidency that has been approved read the title of the project.
Ask Mr. Chairman Manuel Ramiro Velasquez:
Senators Want Commission make this project and move on to the second debate in the plenary of the Senate? Mr. Secretary
:
Tells the President, Senators of the Commission does want this project through a second debate in the plenary of the Senate. Consequently
Mr. Manuel Ramiro Velasquez Arroyave President:
Assigns second debate as speakers for the same Senators of the Commission of speakers who presented the report presentation today.
Is continued with the agenda. "

The Secretary General of the Second Committee of the Senate of the Republic, recorded September 15, 2009, [10] certifies that the project was discussed and approved in first debate on September 17, 2008, with a deliberative quorum and decision of 12 of the 13 senators who make up the Senate Second Commission, as stated in the Act No. 11 of this date, published in the Gazette No. 331 of 2009.
2.4.2. The processing of Bill 009 Senate 2008, in the Plenary of the Senate
The report of the second debate in the Senate was introduced by Senators Cecilia López Montaño, Carlos Emiro Barriga Penaranda, Jesus Enrique Piñacué Achicué, Alexandra Moreno Piraquive, Luzelena Restrepo Betancur, Mario Male Olarte, Marta Lucia Ramirez and Nancy Patricia Gutiérrez and published in the Gazette number 868 Congress November 27, 2008, in a favorable direction.
The bill was first announced to be "discussed and approved at the next meeting" by the Senate of the Republic at the regular meeting of December 11, 2008, as stated in the Act number 35 of the same date published in the Congress Gazette No. 208 of 2009. the announcement was made as follows:
Act No. 35 of the Ordinary Session day
THURSDAY 11 DECEMBER 2008
(...) | || "on instructions of the President and in accordance with Legislative Act number 01 of 2003, the Secretariat announced the projects to be discussed and adopted at the next session.
Yes Mr. President, projects to discuss and vote at the next plenary session are:
(...)
Bills for the second debate:
Bill No. 9 "Through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey "made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006" is approved.
(...)
Being 5:10 pm, the Chair adjourned the meeting and calls for Monday, December 15, 2008, at 2:00 pm ".
The project was discussed and approved on Tuesday, December 15, 2008, as stated in Act No. 36 of this date, published in the Congress Gazette number 223 of 21 April 2009. The approval of the project was done in the follows:
36 MINUTES oF MEETING oF DECEMBER 15, 2008 SENATE
(...)
in Bogota, DC, fifteen (15) days of December two thousand and eight (2008) previous citation, gathered in the grounds of the honorable Senate members thereof, in order to meet in full.
I
(...)
By Secretariat reported that decision constituted a quorum. Being
11:50 am, the Presidency states: open the session and proceed Secretary read out the agenda for this meeting.
By Secretary read the agenda of the current session.
(...)

V reading papers and consideration of projects in second debate
(...)
10. Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the commercial cooperation agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara on May 17, 2006 is approved.
(...)
by instructions of the President and in accordance with Legislative Act number 01 2003. Secretariat
for projects to be discussed and adopted at the next session advertised.
Mr President, the following are the projects to discuss and vote at the next plenary session:
(...)
- Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the Convention was adopted Commercial cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
(...)
with the permission of the President makes use of the word the honorable Senator Cecilia López Montaño:
Thank you, Mr. President, project No. 10 is a very easy project, which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement is approved between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic Turkey, I am one of the speakers, this really is a political agreement, in terms of trade no big deal, it's just a ... at the request of the honorable Senator Cecilia López Montaño, the Presidency submitted to the Plenary alteration Agenda, to discuss and vote on the draft Law No. 09 of 2008 Senate and closed discussion, this imparts approval.
The Presidency instructs the Secretariat continue to the next project.

Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, signed in Ankara made and approved on May 17
2006. the Presidency granted the use of the word to the honorable speaker Senator Cecilia López Montaño. Words of the honorable Senator Cecilia López Montaño.
(...)
The Presidency directs the Secretary to read the proposal that ends the report. By reading Secretariat it is given to the positive proposal that ends the report presentation. The Presidency submitted to the Plenary the proposal read and closed discussion, this imparts approval.
second debate opens the request of the honorable Senator Cecilia López Montaño, the Presidency asked the Plenary if you agree to skip the reading of the articles of the project and closed discussion, it responds affirmatively.
The Presidency submitted to the Plenary articulated the project and closed his question discussion: Plenary adopts the proposed articulated?
And this answer yes.
The Presidency directs the Secretary to read the title of the project.
By Secretary read the title of Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey is approved, made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
read this, the Presidency submits for consideration by the plenary, and closed his discussion question: Do you approve of the Corporation members read the title?
And these impart approval. Compliments
constitutional, legal and regulatory procedures, the Presidency question: Do you want the Senators present the bill passed fill your honorable pending in the House of Representatives? And they respond affirmatively.
The Presidency instructs the Secretariat continue to the next project. According
certification by the Secretary of the Plenary of the Senate, the Senate Project 009 of 2008 was approved unanimously by a vote of 98 Senators. [11]
2.4.3. The processing of the Bill Senate 009 2008, 252 2008 House in the Second Standing Committee Constitutional Chamber of Representatives
The President of the Senate, Hernán Andrade Serrano, sent a communication dated 18 December 2008 the President of the House of Representatives, Germán Male Cotrino, the copy of the record of bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate, through which the commercial cooperation agreement is approved between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, in order that their legal and regulatory course is followed in the House of Representatives.
The paper for the first debate before the Second Standing Constitutional Committee of the House, the representative corresponded Jairo Alfredo Fernandez Quessep and was published in the Congress Gazette number 218 of April 17, 2009. [12]
The project was announced on April 22, 2009, to be discussed and voted in the first debate, as stated in the Congress Gazette number 543 2009. The previous notice required by article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 did the Secretary of the Second Committee of the House of Representatives, by instruction of the President of the Second Joint Commission, as follows:
CONSTUTUCIONAL PERMANENT COMMISSION SECOND RECORD NUMBER

26, 2009 (April 22 )
I
(...)
"Ads bills to comply with article 8 of Legislative Act number 01 of 2003. These bills will be discussed and voted on at the next meeting to have the commission second of the House, as you ordered Mr. President. "
(...)
"4. Bill number 2008 252 Chamber, through which the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey is approved.
(...)
"Makes use of the word President, honorable Representative Pedro Pablo Trujillo Ramirez.
"Well Dr. Silfredo, the meeting was adjourned and convened for the next date that opportunely will referenciándoles.
The meeting adjourned at 12:56 pm ".
The Draft Law No. 252 of 2008 House, 009 2008 Senate was approved at the meeting of April 28, 2009, as stated in the Act No. 27 of 2009, published in the Gazette No. 544 of 2009 and was approved in the following terms:
RECORD NUMBER 27 OF 2009 SECOND CONSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE PERMANENT

HONORABLE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
RECORD NUMBER

27, 2009 (April 28)
(...) AGENDA

For ordinary session on Tuesday 28 April 2009.
(...) |
|| III discussion and approval of bills in the first debate.
(...)
Makes use of the floor to the Secretary of the Commission, Dr. Pilar Rodriguez Arias:
Bill No. 09 of 2008 Senate Chamber 252 2008, by which approves the commercial cooperation agreement between the government of the Republic of Colombia and the government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
Authors: Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Jaime Bermudez and Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata.
Speaker: Honorable Representative Alfredo Fernandez Jairo Quessep.
Publications of the project. Presentation
first debate Camera: Gazette No. 218 of 2009.
The Secretary General of the Second Committee of the House of Representatives, constancy of April 28, 2009, [13] certifies that the project was discussed and approved in first debate on April 28, 2009, with a deliberative and decision-making quorum of 17 of the 19 representatives that make up the Second Committee of the House.
2.4.4. The proceedings in the plenary of the House of Representatives Bill 009, 2008 Senate Chamber
252 2008 The presentation for the second debate to the Plenary of the House of Representatives was presented by the Representative Jairo Alfredo Fernandez Quessep, and it was published in the Congress Gazette number 354 of May 22, 2009. [14]
To comply with the requirements of the 8th article of Legislative Act 01 of 2003, the bill was previously announced for the second debate in the plenary of the House of Representatives for the first time on June 16, 2009, to be discussed and voted in the first debate at the next session, that is, on June 17, 2009, as stated in the Congress Gazette number 1019 2009. [15]
At the sitting of June 17, the project was not discussed or approved by the Plenary of the House, and the announcement is repeated at the end of the session, as stated in the Congress Gazette number 840 2009 for be voted at the meeting of 18 June 2009. at the sitting of 17 June 2009, the prior notice required by article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 did the Secretary of the House of Representatives, by instruction of the President Second Joint Commission, as follows:
the Secretary General of the House of Representatives, Dr. Jesus Rodriguez Alfonso Camargo, reports:
Mr. President with your permission and with due respect and we have to proceed to ad .
Session Directs the President of the House of Representatives, Dr. Germán Male Cotrino: then proceed to the announcement of what the reconciliations and bills announced for tomorrow at one o'clock.
The General Secretary of the House of Representatives, Dr. Flor Marina Daza Ramirez, reports: "The following projects plenary session on June 18 in which bills are debated legislation or are announced by the Legislative Act 01 July 3, 2003.
(...) Projects
second debate.
(...)
Bill 2008 House number 252, 009, 2008 Senate, through which the "Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic approved Turkey "made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006.
(...)
Mr. President, they have been announced bills.
Directs the meeting, the Chairman of the House of Representatives, Dr. Germán Male Cotrino. The meeting rose and appointment tomorrow at one p.m. [16]
The bill was debated and approved on June 18, 2009, as stated in the Act No. 189 of this date, published in the Gazette No. 861 of 8 September 2009. The title of the project was approved in vote ordinary. The vote on the draft was as follows:

MINUTES OF PLENARY Number 189 of the regular meeting on Thursday, June 18, 2009
Presidency of the honorable Representatives Germán Male Cotrino, Odin Horacio Sanchez Montes de Oca, Lidio Arturo Garcia Turbay.
In Bogotá, DC, headquarters Constitutional Congress, on June 18, 2009, opening at 1:44 pm registration, beginning at 2:17 pm, met in the Oval Room of the Capitol national, honorable Congressmen listed below in order of sesionar in accordance with the legal mandate.
(...) Projects

second debate (...)

12. Bill number 252 of 2008 House, 009 2008 Senate, through which the Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey done and signed at Ankara was approved on 17
May 2006. Authors: Foreign Minister Dr. Jaime Bermudez, Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata.
Speaker: Honorable Representative Alfredo Fernandez Jairo Quessep.
Publication Project: Congress Gazette number 461
2008. Publication paper first debate: Congress Gazette number 218
2009. Publication paper for the second debate: Congress Gazette number 354 2009. || | Commission Approved: April 28, 2009. Notice
:
17 June 2009. (...)
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme: Next item on the agenda, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: By means of which the agreement is approved trade cooperation between the government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara, 17
May 2006. Report of paper. Take second debate the bill through which the cooperation agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara, on May 17, 2006. Signature Jairo Alfredo approved Fernandez Quessep.
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme: In consideration, the proposition with which ends the report presentation, discussion, announced that it will close, opening is closed Do you approve the House's proposition with which ends the report of the paper?
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: Approved, President.
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme:
Articulado, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: They have three items without proposition.
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme:
In consideration, the block of three articles without proposition, open discussion, announced that it will close, is closed do you approve the House block of three articles?
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: Approved President.
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme:
Project title, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: By means of which the agreement is approved trade cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey, made and signed in Ankara, 17
May 2006. Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme: considering the title of the project, open discussion, announced that it will close, is closed do you approve the project title the House ?
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: Approved, President.
Session Address by the Chair, Dr. Fabio Raul Amín Saleme:
Want the House that this bill becomes law of the Republic?
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Alfonso Rodriguez C .: So you want.
According to the Secretary of the House of Representatives Bill 2008 Chamber 252, 009, 2008 Senate, was approved unanimously by vote by 153 representatives present at the meeting of 18 June 2009. [17]
The final text of the Bill 252 of 2008 House, 009 2008 published in the Gazette number 563 Congress July 10, 2009. On July 31, 2009 the President of the Republic passed a law approving the Convention under review, becoming the Act 1345 of 2009, published in the Official Gazette number 47427 of July 31, 2009.
2.4.5. Compliance with constitutional and legal requirements in the legislative process of the Law Unconstitutional 1345 2009 1345 2009 Law
According to the above description, the Commercial Cooperation Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Turkey "made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006 and the law surtieron not fully approved the procedure laid down in the Constitution and the law. As it will be seen later in the Second Committee of the House of Representatives for voting prior announcement of the project did not meet the constitutional requirements.
2.4.5.1 Initiation of proceedings in the Senate

In accordance with Article 154 pointing of the Constitution, bills relating to international relations must begin their process in the Senate. In the present case, the bill was introduced on July 20, 2007 at the Secretariat of the Senate by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Jaime Bermudez; Commerce, Industry and Tourism, Luis Guillermo Plata Paez.
Therefore, the Bill which culminated in the adoption of Law 1395 of 2009 effectively fulfilled the requirement of Article 154 of the Charter to start its passage through the Senate. 2.4.5.2
terms that should mediate between debates
According to Article 160 of the Charter, must mediate the passage of a bill in the respective corresponding constitutional commission and the plenary a period not less than 8 days and between approval of the project in one of the chambers and the initiation of the debate in the other, one of at least 15 days.
In the case under study, the bill was (i) approved on first debate by the Second Committee of the Senate on September 17, 2008, (ii) for the Plenary Senate December 15, 2008 ; (Iii) by the Second Committee of the House of Representatives on April 28, 2009, and thereafter, (iv) it was approved in second debate by the Plenary of the House of Representatives on 18 June 2009. || | That is the constitutional terms of 8 to 15 days set out in Article 160 in question is respected. 2.4.5.3 Official Publications

Article 157, paragraph 1 of the Constitution states the obligation to make the official publication of the project by Congress and the paper before being sent to the respective committee. [18] These publications were completed as follows:
a) Publication of the original text of the project, together with the respective explanatory statement in the Gazette of the Congress of the Republic number 461 2008.
b) The publication of the paper for first debate in the second Standing Constitutional Commission of the Senate was in the Congress Gazette number 626 of 11 September 2008 and the project was discussed and approved on 17 September 2008.
c) for the second debate in the Senate, the paper was published on November 27, 2008 in the Congress Gazette number 953 of 2008, and was discussed and approved on 15 December 2008.
d) in the House, the paper first debate was published on April 17, 2009 in the Congress Gazette number 218 of 2009 and was discussed and approved on 28 April 2009.
e) the presentation for the second debate in the House was published on 22 May 2009 in the Congress Gazette number 354 of 2009 and was discussed and approved on 18 June 2009.
Therefore, the Constitutional Court concludes that the publication requirement of Article 157, paragraph 1 is fulfilled, of the letter. 2.4.5.4 Quorum and majorities

As for the decision quorum of Article 146 of the Constitution, as certified by the Secretaries of the Senate and the House, voting took place by majority vote, a quorum being met, in accordance with the constitutional requirement.
According to the Secretary General of the Second Committee of the Senate, the bill was approved with a deliberative and decision-making quorum of 12 of the 13 senators who make up the Second Senate [19] Commission. Similarly, according to certification by the Secretary of the Second Committee of the House, the bill was approved with a deliberative and decision-making quorum of 17 of the 19 representatives that make up the Second Committee of the House. [20]
As for the second debate before the plenary of the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress Gazettes 223 861 2009 and 2009, respectively, which were published these meetings know that the vote on the project and its it was unanimously approval of Congress who attended. At the plenary of the Senate bill passed with a quorum of 98 senators [21] and in the House with a quorum of 153 representatives to the House. [22]
2.4.5.5 Advance notice provided for in article 8 of Legislative Act 1 of 2003
About compliance with the requirement of prior notice referred to in the article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003, which added Article 160 of the Charter, [23] the Constitutional Court has stated on several occasions that this provision mandates (1) the date of voting on the bills is previously announced; (2) that the announcement of such a vote is made differently from that of the session that is submitted for approval session; and (3) that the vote must be filled the day it is announced. [24] So in Judgment C-576 of 2006, the Corporation said:

"In accordance with the jurisprudence of this Court, the purpose of the Legislative Act, is" to allow Congressmen know what prior bills or reports of presidential objections will be put to the vote, assuming the full knowledge of them and avoiding therefore to be surprised with unearthly feedback. "[25]
The Court has held that this provision required for compliance at a previous meeting that the projects to be discussed and voted on at a later session, as long as they convene for approval at a future date predetermined and determined are announced, or at least, determinable. [26] The constitutional requirement points to effective prior knowledge of the projects that will be a decision, so that if, for reasons of development of legislative debate, the vote of a project does not take place the day initially set, are not incurred inexorably infringement to the Constitution, if it becomes clear and again the advertisement or if the context there are elements to clear when the vote [27] "will be held. [28]
The Court has also indicated as minimum requirements to be met by the prior announcement, to be made by the President of the respective legislative cell, or at least by the Secretary on instructions from the President of the Commission or the Plenary. [29] There is no requirement a specific sacramental form that uses the terms vote or approval, but has accepted that similar expressions, of which it is possible to infer what are being called congressmen and being in compliance are used to he ordered the Legislative Act 01 of 2003
Finally, the announcement for voting on a bill should be for a later session to one in which the announcement is made, "as long as they convene for (...) and a future date preset determined, or at least, determinable. "[30] In the Judgment C-533 of 2008, the Court pointed out how these conditions must be met: [31]
(...) under the judgments of constitutionality that has issued this Court on the matter have been established criteria interpretation that should guide the work of the constitutional court to examine the budgets of existence and validity of this constitutional requirement. (...)
A) not serving a specific sacramental formula: It is not necessary to use certain linguistic expressions for notice because what is important is to convey unequivocally the intention to vote on a given project. The Court has validated such terms as "announce", "discuss" and "approve".
B) Determination of future session which will take place the vote on the draft, because otherwise makes an announcement that determined or determinable not contrary to the constitutional requirement: although the constitutional requirement of that in one session previous projects to be discussed and voted on at a later session are announced, it is not necessary to indicate the exact date when the voting will be done whenever determinable, for example, the Court has endorsed expressions like "next Tuesday", "next session "," next week "," next session "and" tomorrow ".
C) Continuation chain ads for postponing the vote except that prior to the approval meeting any been announced: against the indefinite postponement of the vote should be continued succession of ads to avoid breaking the sequence temporary notice, however, no constitutional requirement is unknown when presented despite this break was announced in the immediately preceding session to vote on the project.
D) Compliance with the constitutional requirement when not fulfilled despite voting for its non performance on the scheduled date it finally happens the first time in returning to sesionarse, ie, at the next session, which can be corroborated basis of the order of the proceedings. [32]
In the case under review, earlier announcements were made as follows:
(i) Ad first debate in the Second Standing Constitutional Commission of the Senate: The bill was announced on 16 September 2008, to be discussed and voted on at the next meeting, and at the end of the meeting said that "tomorrow Wednesday, September 17 from 10 am" was cited [33] and the project was voted and effectively adopted on 17 September 2008. this Commission prior notice requirement laid down in article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 was fully achieved for the following reasons:

(A) the announcement was made by the Secretary of the Commission.
(B) the term "announcement discussion and voting on Bills for the next session, (Article 8 of Legislative Act of 2003)" was used to specifically point out what were being called congressmen.
(C) the announcement for voting on a bill, it must be for a later session to one in which the announcement is made, as long as it is convened to (...) a future date predetermined and fixed, or at least, determinable "[34]. In the case under review, the congressmen were cited for the "next session", and at the end of it, were called "tomorrow Wednesday at ten o'clock," so that Congress knew for certain when sesionarían and what was the subject of that meeting, "to vote the bill".
(D) The vote was effectively in the next session. In the present case, the Secretary of the Second Committee of the Senate after he informed that the next meeting on Bill 009, 2008 Senate vote, said at the end of the session that was cited for "Wednesday morning" so which, for the members of the Second Committees, was unclear when it would be discussed and voted on the project. Therefore prior announcement was made clearly according to the constitutional requirement.
(Ii) Ad second debate in the Plenary of the Senate: The project was announced on December 11, 2008, to be discussed at the next plenary session, set for the day December 15, 2008, at 2: 00 pm
therefore, the requirement of prior notice laid down in article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 was fulfilled according to the constitutional requirements:
(a) the announcement was made by the Secretary of the House, on instructions from the President of the Corporation.
(B) As for the terms used to make the announcement, the Secretary of the House says "in accordance with Legislative Act number 01 of 2003, the Secretariat announced the projects to be discussed and adopted at the next session" .
(C) The announcement was made clearly, because at the end, the Speaker of the House adjourns and says: "(...) calls for Monday, December 15, 2008, at 2 : 00 pm "so for the Congress was clear in which session would take place the debate and vote on the draft.
(D) The vote was in session after that in which the prior announcement was made and the date set for it, as had been reported. In this case, the prior announcement was made on 11 December 2008 and the vote on the draft was held on December 15, 2008, as it had been informed of Congress, meeting the constitutional requirements.
(Iii) Ad first debate in the Second Standing Committee Constitutional Chamber of Representatives: The bill was announced on April 22, 2009, to be discussed and voted: "... in the next session that has the ... second Chamber commission, "and at the end of the session, instead of pointing a fixed or determinable date, he said:" ... the session gets up and calls for the next date will be referenciándoles timely ". To that extent it was not possible to know the Representatives to the House when it would be voted the bill.
The next session took place on April 28, 2009, however not recorded how the congressmen who had learned session, given the ambiguity that had been summoned. Such ambiguity should have been overcome by repeating the announcement in that session, and the call for a fixed or determinable date, to respect the chain of advertisements and requires ratings Notwithstanding the foregoing Legislative Act 01 of 2003, the project was voted and approved on April 28, 2009. [35] So, project approval at the meeting of the Commission Second Standing House of Representatives, held on April 28, according to act number 27 of 2009, was not carried out in accordance with the aforementioned constitutional mandate, whose rule was exposed at the beginning of this point.

This Commission prior notice requirement laid down in article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 is not fully achieved since the announcement for voting on a bill, it must be for a later session to that in the the announcement is made, as long as they convene for (...) a future date predetermined and fixed, or at least determinable. "[36] In the case under review, the congressmen were cited for the "next session", but at the end of it, was not determined when would the next meeting and simply said that this date would be "referenced in the future". In this case, having no element to determine when would the next session, or the congressmen and citizenship nor knew with certainty when the Commission would meet.
Since the project announcement to vote must be done during the sessions of the legislative cells and full of constitutional requirements, any informal citation by outside the sessions or without the necessary elements to provide certainty about the meeting date and purpose of the session to those interested in a particular project, invalid, and therefore causes the constitutionality of Law 1345 of 2009.
(iv) ad second debate in the Plenary the House of Representatives. The project was first announced on June 16, 2009, and reiterated at the meeting of June 17, 2009, to be voted at the plenary session on 18 June 2008. The project was actually voted and approved in that session. Therefore, the requirement of prior notice laid down in article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 was fulfilled according to the constitutional requirements:
(a) The announcement was made by the General Secretary of the House, on instructions from the President of that corporation.
(B) As for the terms used to make the announcement, Undersecretary of the House uses the term "plenary session in which bills are debated or legislative act".
(B) As for the terms used to make the announcement, the Secretary of the House says "according to the Legislative Act number 01 of 2003".
(C) The announcement was made clearly, as the undersecretary said "the following projects for plenary session on June 18 Announced" so for Congress was clear in which session would take place debate and vote on the draft.
(D) Voting was done in the session after that in which the prior announcement was made and the date set for it, as had been reported. In this case, the prior announcement was made on 17 June 2009 and the vote on the draft was held on June 18, 2009, as it had been informed of Congress, meeting the constitutional requirements.
(E) The vote was actually at the meeting of 18 June 2009, ie immediately following the one in which the announcement was made session.
What described it it can be concluded that the notice for carrying out the debate on this bill in the Second Committee of the House of Representatives was not duly performed by not indicating a specific or at least determinable date for the next debate .
As was stated in paragraph (iii), the announcement of the first debate in the Second Standing Committee Constitutional Chamber of Representatives failed to meet the requirements in Article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003
in this regard, the Court in the Judgment C-576 of 2006 (MP. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa) established a shortcoming in the conduct of ads for discussions at a later time to vote in the Plenary of the Senate is considered a fundamentally flawed that will trigger the return of a law approving an international treaty to Congress to remedy the defect and continue the process from the moment that occurred when remediableness other conditions are met.

In this case the defect is remedied because, as was widely discussed in the Second Committee and the Plenary of the Senate structural stages of the legislative process were respected and only in the Second Committee of the House of Representatives failed to comply the requirement set out in Article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph of Article 241 of the Charter, the bill number 2008 009 Senate and 252 House of Representatives 2008 , you must return to that legislative cell to the Second Standing Constitutional Commission of the House of compliance with the provisions in Article 8 of legislative Act 01 of 2003 and thereafter continue with the corresponding legislative process.
The Congress will have until June 20, 2010, the date on ending the second session of the current legislature, to complete the formation process of the law. As noted by the Corporation, an order of this nature is compatible with the prohibition contained in Article 162 CP., Since the limit of two terms applies only to the original formation of the law, but may extend deadlines additional set by the Constitutional Court in order to remedy procedural problems. [37]
After the procedure stocked in Congress and presidential approval in the terms set out in the Constitution, Law 1345 of 2009 shall be sent to the Court to decide on the constitutionality of the Act, as provided for in paragraph article 241 Superior.
On this last point, it should be noted that the presidential approval, while approvingly refers to the same act subject to analysis, it will not catch the change in the identification of the law. In this regard, the Legal Secretariat of the Presidency of the Republic, when exercising the jurisdiction provided for in Article 8 of Decree 2719 of 2000, keep the number of Law 1345 of 2009. This because, as it has held this Corporation, [38] the correction of a defect in the legislative process by Congress does not incur any change in relation to the nominal project identification and passing the resulting law. [39]
VI. DECISION
In light of the foregoing, the Plenary Chamber of the Constitutional Court, administering justice on behalf of the people and by mandate of the Constitution, Resolves
:
First. For General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court, let him return to the presidency of the House of Representatives Law 1345 of 2009, through which the "Agreement on Trade Cooperation between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic approved Turkey ", made and signed in Ankara on 17 May 2006, in order to process the procedural remedy of defects identified in this decision.
Second. Treat yourself to the Second Standing Committee Constitutional Chamber of Representatives within 30 days from the date of notification of this order to the Presidency of the same, to remedy the defect detected in this decision.
Third. Once corrected the defect that the preamble of this decision referred to the House of Representatives have until June 20, 2010, to meet the later stages of the legislative process. Then the President of the Republic shall have the period specified in the Charter to sanction the bill.
Room. Completed the previous procedure, the President of Congress sent to the Court Act 1345 of 2009, for a final decision on its constitutionality.
Notified, communicated, published, inserted in the Gazette of the Constitutional Court, filed the dossier and enforcement. Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo
, President; Maria Victoria Street Correa, Juan Carlos Henao Pérez, Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio, Nilson Pinilla Pinilla, (absent in committee); Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub, Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto, Luis Ernesto Vargas Silva, Justices.
Sáchica Martha Victoria Mendez, Secretary General
.
(A-053 2010).
* * *

1 Constitutional Court, Judgment C-468 of 1997 (MP: Alejandro Martinez Caballero). This doctrine has been widely reiterated by the Corporation. See, among many others, Case C-378 1996 (MP: Hernando Herrera Vergara); C-682 1996 (MP: Fabio Moron Diaz); C-400, 1998 (MP: Alejandro Martinez Caballero); C-924 2000 (MP: Carlos Gaviria Díaz); C-206, 2005 (MP: Clara Ines Vargas Hernandez); C-176, 2006 (MP: Álvaro Tafur Galvis); C-958, 2007 (MP Jaime Córdoba Triviño); C-927, 2007 (MP: Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto); C-859, 2007 (MP: Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo); C-464, 2008 (MP: Jaime Araújo Rentería); C-387, 2008 (MP: Rodrigo Escobar Gil); C-383, 2008 (MP: Nilson Pinilla Pinilla); C-189, 2008 (MP: Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa); C-121, 2008 (MP: Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra); C-032, 2009 (MP Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra.); C-031, 2009 (MP Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto.); C-094, 2009 (MP Royal Clara Elena Gutierrez.); C-150, 2009 (MP Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo.); C-195, 2009 (MP Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio.); 2009 C-285 (MP Nilson Pinilla Pinilla.); C-378, 2009 (MP Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto.); C-685, 2009 (MP. Luis Ernesto Vargas Silva).
2 View Constitutional Court, Judgments C-468 1997 (MP: Alejandro Martinez Caballero); C-376 1998 (MP: Alejandro Martinez Caballero); C-426 2000 (MP: Fabio Moron Diaz); C-924 2000 (MP: Carlos Gaviria Díaz).
3 Pursuant to Article 204 of the Rules of Congress, the draft law approving international treaties are handled by the ordinary or common legislative procedure, with the specificities established in the Charter (on the initiation of the process of law in the Senate, Article 154, CN) and the regulations on the possibility of presenting proposals for non-approval, postponement or reservation to international treaties and conventions (art. 217 of the Act 5 of 1992). Regarding this possibility, in Judgment C-227 of 1993 (MP: Jorge Arango Mejía), the Court noted that proposals may be submitted not approval, postponement or during the processing of a bill approving the treaty, reservation to treaties and international agreements.
4 Article 19 of the 1969 Convention on Law of Treaties says: "A State may make a reservation when signing, ratifying, accepting, approving a treaty or accede to it, unless: a) the reservation is prohibited by the treaty; b) The treaty provides that only specified reservations, which do not include the reservation in question (...) "In practice conventional solutions are diverse: some treaties prohibit any bookings (such as the Convention Montego Bay 1982 on the law of the Sea Convention or the New York and Rio de Janeiro on Biodiversity and Climate Change); others authorize reservations on certain provisions only (eg Article 42 of the Refugee Convention of 1951) and some exclude certain categories of reserves (such as Article 64 of the European Convention on Human Rights prohibiting reserves vague). Generally, a reservation expressly permitted by the final clauses of the treaty need not be approved or accepted by other States (Article 20, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Conventions of 1969 and 1986).
5 Constitutional Court C-750, 2008 (MP Clara Inés Vargas Hernández). 6
Congress Gazette number 461 of July 28, 2008, pp. 16-18.
7 Congress Gazette number 626 of September 11, 2008, pp 3-5.
8 289 Congress Gazette number 2007 of May 7, 2009, pp. 2-3.
9 Congress Gazette number 331 of May 19, 2009, Act No. 11 of 2008. The approval of this act occurred on 21 October 2008. 10 CFR
. Folio 2 Booklet 3 test.
11 Cf. Folio 2 Notebook 1 trials.
12 Gazette number 218 Congress of April 17, 2009, pp 1-2.
13 Cf. Folios 10 Booklet 2 test.
14 Gazette number 354 Congress May 22, 2009 pp. 1-2.
Gazette number 1019 15 2009.
Congress Gazette number 16 840 Congress September 3, 2009 pp. 116-117.
17 Cf. Folio 3 Notebook 4 tests. 18
Constitution. Article 157. No bill shall become law without meeting the following requirements: | 1. Have been officially released by Congress before being sent to the respective committee. (...) ".
19 Office dated 15 September 2009 issued by Second Standing Constitutional Committee, Foreign Affairs, Defense and National Security, Foreign Trade and honors of the Senate to the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court.

20 Report dated April 28, 2009 issued by the General Secretariat of the Second Standing Constitutional Commission.
21 Office dated 14 September 2009 issued by General Secretary of the Senate of the Republic and to the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court.
22 Certificate of the House of Representatives, issued at 21 days of September 2009.
23 Article 160 of the Constitution was added by article 8 of Legislative Act 01 dated July 3, 2003 as follows: "Article 8.. Article 160 of the Constitution will have an additional paragraph as follows: | No bill will be voted differently from that which has previously been announced session. Notice that a project will be put to the vote will give the presidency of each Chamber or Committee in separate session to one in which the vote will take place. "
24 See among others the judgments C-644 2004 (MP: Rodrigo Escobar Gil), SV: Rodrigo Yepes Uprimny; C-549, 2006 (MP: Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa); C-172, 2006 (MP Jaime Córdoba Triviño); C-241, 2006 (MP: Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra) and 038 Cars 2004 089 2005 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa.). See Auto
25 038 2004 (MP. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa) and Judgment C-533 of 2003 (MP. Alvaro Tafur Galvis).
26 Constitutional Court Judgment C-644 of 2004 (MP: Rodrigo Escobar Gil, SV: Rodrigo Yepes Uprimny).
27 Constitutional Court, Judgment C-533 of 2004 (MP. Alvaro Tafur Galvis).
28 Constitutional Court, C-576, 2006 (MP: Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa), with partial dissenting opinion of Jaime Araújo Rentería. In this judgment the Court also stated when the failure to meet the requirement of Article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 was irremediable, particularly as it relates to laws approving treaties. On this point the following is said: "" 5.3. The possibility that compliance with the requirement referred to in Article 8 of Legislative Act 01 of 2003 in the legislative process of the law approving a treaty or international agreement -rompimiento chain prior to the vote on the draft ads depends law- the context in which it occurred vice and its impact on the formation of the will of Congress. | 5.4. As it regards the processing of laws approving international treaties or agreements to remember that these laws work the same way procedure ordinary laws (...) with the particularity that the bill should begin its passage in the Senate and competence of the Congress merely approve or reject the treaty or agreement (...). The Court has determined as important criteria to establish the subsanibilidad of this vice as follows: "(i) compliance with the basic and structural stages of the legislative process set out in Article 157 of the Charter; (Ii) the context within which the defect was filed; (Iii) ensuring the rights of minorities throughout the parliamentary debate and the democratic principle in the voting of the bill; (Iv) the type of law concerned and its evolution throughout the parliamentary debate. "(...) In keeping with the criteria and characteristics mentioned should be understood that in terms of laws approving international treaties or conventions, the condition remediableness essential is that the Senate has decided so that the House where constitutional mandate has initiated the process of draft laws approving a treaty comprehensively expressed their will. Thus, one of the structural stages of the process, eg, approval by the Senate, will be fully completed no vice. | (...) In other words, a shortcoming in fulfilling the requirement of prior notice laid down in Article 160 CP. until the vote in the Plenary of the Senate is considered as an irremediable defect in the legislative process that will trigger the declaration of unconstitutionality of a law approving an international treaty. On the other hand, a shortcoming in the fulfillment of that requirement in a post-vote in the Plenary of the Senate time is considered a fundamentally flawed that will trigger the return of a law approving an international treaty to Congress to remedy the defect and continue the process from the moment that occurred when remediableness other conditions are met.

29 See for example, Case C-533 2004 (MP. Alvaro Tafur Galvis), C-661, 2004, (MP. Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra), C-780, 2004 (MP. Jaime Córdoba Triviño) 2005 C-333 (MP Jaime Cordoba Trivedi.), 2005 C-400 (MP Humberto Sierra Porto.), C-930 2005 (MP Jaime Cordoba Trivedi.); C-676, 2006 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa.); C-387, 2008 (MP: Rodrigo Escobar Gil), C-799, 2008 (MP Clara Inés Vargas Hernández.), C-031, 2009 (MP Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto.); C-150, 2009 (MP Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo.); C-195, 2009 (MP Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio.); C-248, 2009 (MP Luis Ernesto Vargas Silva.); 2009 C-379, C-376, 2009 (MP. Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo).
30 Constitutional Court. Judgment C-644 of 2004 (MP Rodrigo Escobar Gil, SV. Uprimny Rodrigo Yepes). See also Case C-930 2005 (MP Jaime Córdoba Triviño SV. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, Rodrigo Escobar Gil and Alvaro Tafur Galvis).
Judgments C-927 31 2007 (MP Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto.); C-718, 2007 (MP Nilson Pinilla Pinilla.); C-502, 2007 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, SV Jaime Araújo Rentería..); C-309, 2007 (MP Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV, SV Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto...); C-933, 2006 (MP Rodrigo Escobar Gil.); C-864, 2006 (MP Rodrigo Escobar Gil, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV..); C-863, 2006 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, SV Jaime Araújo Rentería..); C-649, 2006 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, AV Jaime Araújo Rentería..); C-576, 2006 (MP Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, SPV Jaime Araújo Rentería.); C-337, 2006 (MP Clara Inés Vargas Hernández, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV..); C-322, 2006 (MP Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV and SV Alfredo Beltrán Sierra...); C-276, 2006 (MM.PP. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa and Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV, SV and SV Alfredo Beltran Sierra Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto...); C-241, 2006 (MP Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra.); C-1040 2005 (MM.PP. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, Rodrigo Escobar Gil, Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra, Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto, Alvaro Tafur Galvis and Clara Ines Vargas Hernandez, SV. Jaime Araújo Rentería, SV. Alfredo Beltran Sierra, SV Jaime Córdoba Triviño, SPV and AV Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto)..; and C-780 2004 (MP. Jaime Córdoba Triviño, SV. Jaime Araújo Rentería, SV. Alfredo Beltran Sierra and SPV. Uprimny Rodrigo Yepes). Also see cars Sala Plena We 232 2007 (MP Jaime Córdoba Triviño, SV Jaime Araújo Rentería...); 145 2007 (MP Nilson Pinilla Pinilla.); A-119 2007 (MP Rodrigo Escobar Gil, Jaime Araújo Rentería SV..); A-053 2007 (MP Jaime Córdoba Triviño, SV Jaime Araújo Rentería..); and A-311 2006 (MP. Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra, SV. Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto, SV. Clara Ines Vargas Hernandez). 32 C-533
2008 (MP. Clara Ines Vargas Hernandez).
33 Gazette number 289 Congress May 7, 2009 pp. 2-3.
34 Constitutional Court. Judgment C-644 of 2004 (MP Rodrigo Escobar Gil, SV. Uprimny Rodrigo Yepes). 35
Congress Gazette number 544 of July 2, 2009.
36 Constitutional Court. Judgment C-644 of 2004 (MP: Rodrigo Escobar Gil, SV: Rodrigo Yepes Uprimny).
37 Cf. Constitutional Court Order 232 2007 (MP. Jaime Córdoba Triviño, with Jaime Araújo Rentería SV). See also the A-089, 2005 (MP. Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa).

38 Cf. Constitutional Court, Judgment C-863 of 2006 (MP: Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa.), In which the constitutionality of a law approving it had received double numbering error was examined, after the Congress Republic had corrected a flaw detected by the Constitutional Court: "in the present case, the Court notes the following: (i) the first issue of law - 869 2004 - is identifying the law approving object control exercised in this process; (Ii) the will of the Legislator, in compliance with Auto 089 of 2005, was to correct the formal defect found by the Corporation in the formation of Law 896 of 2004; (Iii) the Bill always corresponded to the same, that is, the Senate 212/03 -111/03 House, as can be confirmed in all the presentations and discussions that were dispensed in Congress, and referral for presidential approval. || However, an administrative error was made in the numbering, having been assigned to a second number to the same law after being vice remedied in forming it. However the error does not change the content of the law and affects the process of its formation in the Congress. For the Court therefore this analysis constitutionality means carried on Law 896 of 2004 which adopted the "Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Colombia and the Government of the Republic of Bolivia for the recovery of cultural property and other specific stolen, illegally imported or exported ", signed in the city of La Paz, twenty (20) days of August of the year two thousand and one (2001)". See the Auto A-018/07 and A-057/07.
39 See Auto 232 2007 (MP. Jaime Córdoba Triviño).

Related Laws