Does the Chilean Constitutional Court protect fundamental rights?

Abstract

This article uses two distinctions that analytic theory of law has highlighted ("regulative norms and norms of competence" and "material and normative acts") to criticize the general understanding of the so-called civil rights as a kind of subjective right. Two different meanings of this rights are found by deconstructing the provisions that entrench them. This contribute to explain the theory that underlies the interpretative practice of the Chilean Constitutional Court and, on this basis, to refute the widespread understanding that consider such court as a protector of fundamental rights at the same time that allow to group the so-called civil and political rights under the same analytical category.