Freedom of Speech versus Honor and Good Name: Collisions between Principles and Precedence Relations in the Colombian Constitutional Jurisprudence

Abstract

This document shows the conditioned precedence relations identified in the constitutional jurisprudence in cases of collisions between the fundamental rights of freedom of speech, honor, and good name derived from the journalistic practice. After analyzing these concrete cases, it is evident that proposing a lesser harmful solution is a challenge for the judging part because there is a scenario in which hierarchically comparable rights collide. For that reason, the judging part must weigh which principle will precede the other one. Likewise, despite the reiterated collision among the rights studied here, there cannot be an egalitarian solution for all of them, given that the effects of the weighing apply to concrete cases. Nonetheless, based on a linear follow-up of the constitutional jurisprudence, the study concludes that a higher or lower grade of veracity and impartiality of the information is a determining factor for inclining the balance towards one place or the other.