Hermeneutical criteria for the coexistence between ordinary criminal jurisdiction and indigenous jurisdiction in Colombia

The current Colombian legal system, as established by the 1991 Political Constitution, recognizes legal pluralism as an anti-formalist strategy of social vindication aimed at addressing everyday demands. In this context, both the Indigenous jurisdiction and the ordinary criminal jurisdiction legally coexist, a situation that has sparked extensive debates regarding the criteria for determining the competence of each jurisdiction. This article seeks to answer the following research question: What legal criteria should guide the construction of a hermeneutic framework that enables the coexistence of ordinary and Indigenous jurisdictions in accordance with the current constitutional provisions in Colombia? To this end, the study delimits the aforementioned coexistence from a theoretical-legal perspective in order to develop interpretive criteria that allow for the determination of jurisdictional competence in specific cases. The research adopts a critical hermeneutic approach, grounded in qualitative methods of analysis.

Keywords
constitutional anti-formalism; legal pluralism; indigenous jurisdiction; ordinary jurisdiction; procedural dichotomy