Jump to content

Argentine Constitution of 1949

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Argentine Constitutional Reforms of 1949 were approved during Juan Domingo Perón's government. This new constitution was a major revision of the Constitution of Argentina. Its goal was to modernize and adapt the text to the twentieth century's concepts of democracy, with a bill of social rights, including better working conditions for the working class, right to education, etc. It also allowed for the indefinite reelection of the president.

It was suppressed by the military and civilian uprising known as Revolución Libertadora.

Background

[edit]

Social constitutionalism and second-generation rights

[edit]

After 1930, several Argentine provinces reformed their constitutions to incorporate the new trends of social constitutionalism (San Juan, Entre Ríos, Buenos Aires, etc.), and calls to reform the Constitution of 1853 became increasingly frequent. In 1937, the Radical Civic Union resolved that it was necessary to reform the Constitution.[1]

In 1931, a book by Rafael Emiliani appeared, titled Bases para la reforma de la Constitución Argentina.[2] In 1936, Rómulo Amadeo published Hacia una nueva constitución nacional[3] and in 1943 Roberto Podestá wrote Antecedentes y puntos de vista para una revisión constitucional.[4]

Among the reform projects presented in the National Congress is that of convention delegate John William Cooke. [5] He precisely explains the ideological foundations for state intervention in the economy that would inspire the 1949 reform:

The enormous financial concentrations—an inevitable result of the struggle for raw materials and markets—created conditions in which none of the assumptions on which liberal economic doctrine was based could be fulfilled. Faced with the growing power of large capitalist organizations with global reach, freedom became a myth, not only economically but also politically. This state of affairs—say the authors of the project—made state intervention in the economic life of nations necessary, both to prevent the exploitation of the weak and to facilitate the organic and balanced development of economic forces.[4]

The creation of the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1919, with a tripartite structure of governments, trade unions, and employers, and the statements in the preamble of its Constitution,[6] of worldwide validity, were factors that strengthened workers' demands around the world to include social rights in national constitutions. Practically all constitutions in the world reorganized their texts to incorporate the rights and guarantees that characterized social constitutionalism and to reorganize the state to actively pursue those aims.[7]

Social constitutionalism is a consequence of the Industrial Revolution, the emergence of the working class, and its organization into trade unions and workers' parties to demand specific labour rights. Social constitutionalism and the constitution of the welfare state that characterized the 20th century are inseparable processes. Labour law became the central axis of the welfare state. In the United States, the process was better known as the New Deal, a term that literally means "New Deal", but which is closer to the idea of a new social contract.[8][9][10]

The core principle of social constitutionalism is social justice, understood as the need to go beyond purely formal declarations of human rights and to assign the state an active role to ensure that constitutional rights are effectively enjoyed by all citizens.[11]

Social constitutionalism goes beyond the field of labour law to include economic, social, and cultural norms. Among the economic norms is the notion of the social function of property; among the social ones, specific guarantees concerning housing, health, social security, and old age; and among the cultural ones, the guarantee of free public education.[9][10]

The Argentine Constitution of 1949 is part of a Latin American movement inspired by social justice. Some scholars have described these movements as "populism" because of their connection with the people,[12][13] a term questioned by others for its pejorative meaning[14] or for its Eurocentric generalization.[15][16]

Debate over "total" or "present" members

[edit]

One of the first debates was whether Congress should meet in joint assembly or whether each chamber should deliberate separately in declaring the need for reform, and whether the points to be reformed should be specified, even if the constitutional modification was total.[17]

Regarding the interpretation of Article 30 of the Constitution of 1853–1860, particularly how the two-thirds majority should be calculated, since Article 30 did not clarify whether it referred to present or total members: one sector of the UCR argued that the constitutional requirement of two-thirds of Congress should be interpreted by adding the word "total" to the phrase "of its members" in the original article.[18][19] Peronism and other opposition parties, however, maintained that Supreme Court rulings and constitutional precedents should be followed, since all reforms had been approved with two-thirds of the members present; the 1853 framers had not included the word "total", and therefore it was not the role of legislators to alter the meaning of the Constitution by adding requirements that did not exist in the original. This position held that the UCR argument lacked legal basis beyond attempting to obstruct legislative debate. On this issue, the UCR split between the Balbín faction, which supported the "total members" thesis, and the group of Moisés Lebensohn and Julio Oyhanarte, which supported the "present members" thesis.[20]

The interpretation of Article 30 had never been questioned: laws no. 234 of the Confederation (1860) and no. 171 (1866), declaring the need to reform the Constitution of 1860 and 1866 respectively, had been enacted with a two-thirds majority of "members present", not total members.[21]

Peronism maintained that the constitutional requirement was two-thirds of the members present,[18] as had been the case in the constitutional reforms of 1860 and 1866.[21]

In the Radical Civic Union there were two opposing positions. On the one hand were the unionist radicalsJosé P. Tamborini, Enrique Mosca, Ernesto Sammartino, etc.—who maintained a strongly anti-Peronist stance and proposed an outright rejection both of the constitutional reform and of participation in elections. Another sector, including the intransigent radicalsRicardo Balbín, Arturo Frondizi, Moisés Lebensohn, Crisólogo Larralde, Arturo Illia, Amadeo Sabattini, etc.—although opposed to Justicialism, expressed support for measures of social progress and economic nationalism, arguing that they should participate in elections and attend the sessions of the Constituent Convention.[22] The radicals took part in elections and attended the first ordinary session. At the time the 1949 Constitution was enacted, the main opposition party, the Radical Civic Union, debated whether its representatives in Congress should swear allegiance to the 1949 Constitution or refuse to do so, as proposed by Miguel Ángel Zavala Ortiz. The head of the radical bloc, Ricardo Balbín, maintained that the UCR should swear to the 1949 Constitution; Balbín's position prevailed and the entire radical bloc took the oath to the 1949 Constitution.[23]

The radicals argued that the phrase "two-thirds, at least, of its members" should be interpreted literally.[24]

The debate between present and total members was never fully resolved. The approval of this rule by two-thirds of those present, according to Bidart Campos, fulfilled the requirement of a correct interpretation of Article 30 of the Fundamental Law, since it does not establish any special majority in its text, applying the Latin maxim "ubi lex non distinguit, nec nostrum est distinguere"—where the law does not distinguish, neither should we—so that approval by two-thirds of the quorum required by Article 56 was sufficient to meet the constitutional requirement.[25] In 1994, the conservative deputy Francisco de Durañona y Vedia drafted a bill establishing that, to declare the need to amend the Constitution, two-thirds of the present members of the chambers of Congress would suffice; it obtained half approval in the Senate.[26]

The Supreme Court accepted the legitimacy of the 1853 Constitution and, from 1949 onward, also the legitimacy of the 1949 reform, applying its provisions in various rulings.[27]

Constitutionalists

[edit]

The 1949 Constituent Convention

[edit]
The president Juan Domingo Perón with the Constitution of Argentina of 1949.

Composition of the Convention

[edit]

Among others, the following delegates participated:[28]

Peronists:
  • Arturo Sampay, jurist and constitutional scholar trained at the National University of La Plata, where he taught, with a social Christian background. Politically, he belonged to the group of Yrigoyenist radicals close to FORJA that in 1946 formed part of the Radical Civic Union Junta Renovadora, one of the parties that founded Peronism. A follower of the thought of Jacques Maritain, after the 1930 coup that overthrew the constitutional president Hipólito Yrigoyen, he became one of the main critics of the Constitution of 1853. In 1949 he himself presented the Justicialist Party with a draft that closely resembled the final reform. During the Constituent Convention he chaired the Constitutional Revision Commission and drafted the report read to the Convention on 8 March 1949. He is unanimously considered the ideologue or "father" of the 1949 Constitution. He authored works such as La crisis del Estado democrático liberal burgués (1942), Introducción a la Teoría del Estado (1951), and Constitución y Pueblo (1974).[29]
Copy of the Constitution of Argentina of 1949 exhibited at the Museo del Bicentenario.
  • Domingo Mercante, a military officer and son of an important trade union railway leader of socialist background and former Secretary of Labor, who together with Perón designed the strategy of alliances with the labor movement in 1943.
  • José Espejo, trade union leader, elected Secretary General of the CGT in 1947.
  • Ítalo Luder, jurist, professor of constitutional law at the universities of Buenos Aires, Catholic, Litoral, and La Plata, later provisional President of the Nation in 1975. He wrote La Jurisprudencia (1951), El Sistema Jurídico de la Ejecución Penal (1959), La Argentina y sus Claves Geopolíticas (1974).
  • Pablo A. Ramella (1906–1993), jurist and constitutionalist from San Juan, with a strong social Christian background. Rector of the Popular University of San Juan and dean of the Faculty of Law and Social Sciences of the Catholic University of Cuyo (1960–1969). Between 1955 and 1957 he was tried and convicted by the dictatorship known as the Revolución Libertadora, spending two years in prison. He was appointed a member of the Supreme Court of Argentina and removed by the dictatorship that took power in 1976. He authored one of the constitutional drafts considered by the Justicialist Party in preparing the party's proposal submitted to the convention. He wrote works such as Reformas a la Constitución de San Juan (1943), La Estructura del Estado (1946), Derecho Constitucional (1960), Introducción Elemental al Derecho (1967), El Desarrollo del Derecho Constitucional Argentino (1969), Los derechos humanos (1980), Atentados a la vida (1980), and La constitución al alcance de todos (1983).[29]
Radicals:

List of members

[edit]

The following is a full list of members of the 1949 Argentine constitutional convention:[28]

National Constituent Convention (1949)
PRESIDENT:Colonel (ret.) Domingo A. Mercante
1ST VICE PRESIDENT:Héctor J. Cámpora
2ND VICE PRESIDENT:José G. Espejo
SECRETARIES:Mario M. Goizueta - Bernardino H. Garaguso
ASSISTANT SECRETARIES:Leónidas Zavalla Carbó - Rafael V. González
DIRECTOR OF THE STENOGRAPHERS' CORPS:Andrés J. Watson
DELEGATES ELECTORAL DISTRICT
Albarracín, Ramón HéctorSan Juan
Albarracín Godoy, JorgeMendoza
Albisu, Juan MartínFederal Capital
Alcorta, VíctorSantiago del Estero
Aloé, Carlos VicenteBuenos Aires
Alonso, AntonioCórdoba
Álvarez Rodríguez, Justo LucasBuenos Aires
Aráoz de Lamadrid, Aristóbulo D.Federal Capital
Arraya, Jorge F.Córdoba
Ávalos Billinghurst, Román AmadeoCorrientes
Avanza, Julio CésarBuenos Aires
Bagnasco, VicenteBuenos Aires
Bassó, Agustín M. A.Santa Fe
Bayol, Augusto G.Santa Fe
Beltrame, Felipe C.Córdoba
Bernasconi, MarioFederal Capital
Berraz Montyn, Carlos I.Santa Fe
Bértora, José MaríaEntre Ríos
Borlenghi, EmilioFederal Capital
Caesar, Juan HugoSanta Fe
Calcagno, Alfredo D.Buenos Aires
Cámpora, Héctor J.Buenos Aires
Candioti, Enrique A.Santa Fe
Cané, FedericoBuenos Aires
Capdevilla, Pedro MaríaLa Rioja
Carballido, DorindoFederal Capital
Carbó, MaximinoCorrientes
Carpio, Eliseo T.Córdoba
Carvajal, EduardoBuenos Aires
Castro, Juan JoséJujuy
Castro, RodolfoFederal Capital
Celiz Díaz, César OctavioCórdoba
Cobelli, Francisco T.Santa Fe
Coloma, JulioLa Rioja
Conditi, CecilioFederal Capital
Correa, Carlos HeraclioCatamarca
Cruz, Ireneo F.Mendoza
Cuñarro, José E.Buenos Aires
De la Vega, Juan CarlosSanta Fe
Del Carril, Emilio DonatoBuenos Aires
Del Mazo, GabrielBuenos Aires
De Virgilio, FranciscoCórdoba
Díaz de Vivar, JoaquínCorrientes
Doglioli, Ernesto A.Santa Fe
Domeniconi, Julio J.San Luis
Escobar Sáenz, Julio M.Buenos Aires
Espeche, LeónidasSantiago del Estero
Espejo, José GregorioFederal Capital
Esteves, EduardoBuenos Aires
Evans, Carlos HoracioMendoza
Fernández Jensen, Carlos A.Santiago del Estero
Figueroa, Nerio JorgeFederal Capital
Filippini, José A.Buenos Aires
Forte, ClementinoCorrientes
Franceschini, Carlos LeonardoCorrientes
Gallo, Luis M.Santa Fe
Garaguso, Bernardino H.Federal Capital
García, AlfredoTucumán
Gaulhiac, EduardoFederal Capital
Giardulli, Cayetano (h)Buenos Aires
Giavarini, Alejandro B.Santa Fe
Giménez, Rafael C.Mendoza
Giménez, Teobaldo JoséSan Juan
Giovanelli, AgustínBuenos Aires
Goizueta, Mario M.Buenos Aires
González, Juan C.Tucumán
Gordillo, Pedro N.Córdoba
Grisolía, Gerónimo J.Federal Capital
Iglesias, RobertoEntre Ríos
Juárez, Carlos ArturoSantiago del Estero
Laffitte, Julio M.Buenos Aires
Lagos, César MarianoBuenos Aires
Lescano, Carlos MaríaFederal Capital
Lescano, RamónBuenos Aires
Lasciar, Guillermo F.Buenos Aires
Lavalle, RicardoBuenos Aires
Lebensohn, MoisésBuenos Aires
Longhi, Luis RicardoBuenos Aires
López Carranza, Juan LuisTucumán
López Quintana, AntonioFederal Capital
López Sansón, ErnestoFederal Capital
Luco, Francisco R.San Luis
Luder, Ítalo ArgentinoBuenos Aires
Manubens Calvet, ReginaldoCórdoba
Marianacci, Nicolás A.Córdoba
Mariani, Anselmo A.Buenos Aires
Márquez, Carlos A.Tucumán
Martín, AntonioSanta Fe
Martínez Casas, MarioCórdoba
Martini, Oscar SalvadorFederal Capital
Maturo, DomingoSanta Fe
Maxud, Alfredo D.Tucumán
Maya, Carlos MaríaEntre Ríos
Medina, Ramón A.Santiago del Estero
Mendé, Raúl AntonioSanta Fe
Méndez San Martín, ArmandoFederal Capital
Mendiolaza, NicomedesSalta
Mercader, Amílcar A.Buenos Aires
Mercante, Domingo A.Buenos Aires
Miel Asquía, Ángel J.Federal Capital
Navarro, Eduardo JoséEntre Ríos
Nazar, Félix AntonioCatamarca
Nicolini, Oscar L. M.Federal Capital
Otero, Leoncio V.Entre Ríos
Otero, ManuelBuenos Aires
Ottonello, Benito J.Buenos Aires
Páez, Juan L.San Luis
Palacios Hidalgo, IgnacioCórdoba
Paladino, Miguel ÁngelBuenos Aires
Palero Infante, RubénMendoza
Parente, Miguel A.Entre Ríos
Parera, FranciscoBuenos Aires
Parodi Grimaux, Misael J.Entre Ríos
Parry, Adolfo E.Federal Capital
Passerini, José LuisBuenos Aires
Peluffo, DomingoFederal Capital
Perazzolo, Juan JoséFederal Capital
Pérez, Felipe SantiagoTucumán
Pérez Aznar, AtaulfoBuenos Aires
Pessagno, AtilioFederal Capital
Pinto Bazán, Julián A.Santiago del Estero
Policicchio, Roque V. (h)Federal Capital
Pontieri, Félix A.Buenos Aires
Pueyrredón, Horacio HonorioBuenos Aires
Quinteros Luques, JoséBuenos Aires
Racedo, Lucio E.Federal Capital
Ramella, Pablo A.San Juan
Ramos, EduardoSalta
Rivarola, Lorenzo O.Tucumán
Robledo, Ángel F.Santa Fe
Rodríguez Jáuregui, EugenioEntre Ríos
Roibon, P. ValentínCorrientes
Roulet, Enrique A.Santa Fe
Salvo, Hilario F.Federal Capital
Sampay, Arturo EnriqueBuenos Aires
Saponaro, José F.Federal Capital
Seeber, Carlos M.Buenos Aires
Simini, Jorge AlbertoBuenos Aires
Sobral, AntonioCórdoba
Solveyra Casares, GuillermoBuenos Aires
Spachessi, Modesto A. E.Córdoba
Spota, Alberto AntonioFederal Capital
Susán, José C.Santa Fe
Sylvestre Begnis, CarlosSanta Fe
Tanco, Miguel AníbalJujuy
Teisaire, AlbertoFederal Capital
Torre, EduardoSanta Fe
Turano, Armando L.Federal Capital
Valenzuela, Rodolfo GuillermoFederal Capital
Vela, Alejandro OctavioEntre Ríos
Vila Vidal, Eduardo OscarMendoza
Villada, Julio César J.Santa Fe
Villar, Justo PolicarpoCorrientes
Visca, José EmilioBuenos Aires
Waite Figueroa, Manuel AlbertoCórdoba
Yáñez, RobustianoSalta
ELECTED DELEGATE NOT SEATED ELECTORAL DISTRICT
López, Pablo E. C.Federal Capital

The reforms

[edit]

Summary

[edit]

The Argentine Constitution of 1949 was part of the social constitutionalism current, incorporating workers' rights (the worker's decalogue), the rights of the family, of old age, of education and culture; state protection for science and art; and compulsory, free primary education. It also established equality between men and women in family relations, university autonomy, the social function of property, direct election of deputies, senators, and the president, and immediate presidential re-election.[30]

A large number of rights and guarantees related to social and economic progress were incorporated, including:

The right of assembly (art. 26) The prohibition of racial discrimination (art. 28) Workers' rights (art. 37, I) Legal equality of men and women in marriage (art. 37, II) The family homestead (art. 37, II) Shared parental authority (art. 37, II) Rights of old age (art. 37, III) Compulsory and free primary education (art. 37, IV) University autonomy (art. 37, IV) The social function of property (art. 38) State control of foreign trade (art. 40) Nationalization of mineral and energy resources (art. 40) State ownership of public services (art. 40) Direct suffrage (arts. 42, 47, and 82)[31][32]

Additions to the preamble

[edit]

The Constitution of 1949 incorporated the following phrase into the preamble:

Form of government and political declarations

[edit]

The Constitution of 1949 incorporated two provisions related to the country's political organization:

  • Defense of democracy and the Constitution: Article 15 established the principle that there is no freedom to attack freedom, the prohibition of forming non-state militias, and the non-recognition of organizations that attacked democracy or the liberties of the Constitution. In addition, Article 21 ordered Congress to pass a law criminally punishing those who advocated or disseminated methods or systems by which, through the use of violence, they proposed to suppress or change the Constitution or any of its basic principles; and Articles 34 and 83, subsection 19, empowered the National Executive Power to decree a "state of prevention and alarm", during which it was authorized to detain people for up to 30 days. Ítalo Lúder justified these provisions on the need to reconcile order and freedom, calling it "militant democracy".[4]
  • Security on rivers: Article 18 limited freedom of navigation on the country's internal rivers in cases in which "national security or welfare" could be affected. Free navigation on internal rivers, established in the Constitution of 1853, was one of the key issues in the civil wars and military conflicts with Great Britain and France in the first half of the 19th century. The reform aimed to open the way to the repression of smuggling, which had spread, and ultimately to establish transit duties.[33]

Organization of the administration of justice

[edit]

It also established reforms in the administration of justice:

  • Trial by jury: The constitutional reform eliminated the jury trial system established by Article 24 of the Constitution of 1853, which had not yet been applied; despite the constitutional prescription, until then there was broad consensus among specialists and political parties that it was not a suitable system for the country. In fact, when the Constitution of 1853 was restored in 1955, none of the successive governments complied with the mandate. The constitutional reform of 1994 confirmed the obligation to organize the Argentine judicial system through the jury system, and from 2004 onward it was established in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Córdoba, Chaco, Entre Ríos, Mendoza, San Juan, Río Negro, Chubut, and Neuquén,[34] and in the city of Buenos Aires.[35]
  • Military jurisdiction: In Article 29 (formerly 18), the original text was supplemented by stating that "military personnel and persons assimilated to them shall be subject to military jurisdiction in the cases established by law" and subjecting "persons who commit offenses punishable under the Code of Military Justice and submitted by law itself to military courts".[31]

Social rights

[edit]
Women's rights
The declaration of legal equality between men and women in marriage and joint parental authority, established by Article 37 of the Constitution of 1949, was one of its most notable provisions, since until then it had not been legally established. When the Constitution of 1949 was repealed, married women in Argentina once again had an inferior status for several more decades. Until 1968, married women were considered relatively legally incapable, similar to minors,[36] and only in 1985 was their legal equality with men regarding parental authority over their children established.[37]

The convention discussed whether the right to strike should be included in the Constitution. Sampay opposed this, stating that the right to strike was a natural right that did not need to be incorporated into positive law, as did fellow Peronist delegate Hilario Salvo, who argued that its inclusion "brings anarchy and casts doubt on whether, from now on, our country will be socially just".[38] The Justicialist delegate Pablo A. Ramella argued in favor of inclusion.[39]

Economic rights

[edit]
Article 40
Article 40 has been regarded by some observers as the core of the 1949 reform and the real cause of its repeal in 1956.[40][41] Article 40 was imposed by the center-left and trade union wing of Peronism, resisting pressure from conservative sectors, the big business lobby, and probably from President Perón himself.[29]

Chapter IV, added to the Constitution by the 1949 reform, was titled "The social function of property, capital, and economic activity". It had three articles: Article 40 generated a crucial conflict, both during and after the reform. Drafted by Sampay, Juan Sabato, and Jorge del Río, who had been key figures in the struggle against the private monopoly of electric service and the corruption of the companies providing the service, which triggered the so-called CHADE scandal.[29]

Article 40 guaranteed decisive state control of the economy in the fields of energy, public services, and foreign trade, as well as in sectors in which private monopolies or oligopolies operated. It also established a mechanism for calculating the expropriation price of companies administering public services, counting against it "surpluses over a reasonable profit".[42]

Explaining the rationale behind his constitutional theory on production goods and natural resources, Sampay stated in a lecture delivered in the early 1970s:

Faced with the reality of multinational companies and the imperialism they exercise by using the power of highly developed states, the principle of sovereignty promotes and conditions the essential progress of contemporary international law. Far from being archaic, therefore, the principle of sovereignty has decisive force for maintaining peace and promoting the progress of peoples.

Arturo Sampay[43]

Several historians maintain that foreign companies exerted pressure so that the proposed article would not be included in the Constitution, even obtaining an attempt by Perón himself to prevent the Constituent Convention from approving Article 40, but that Sampay prevented this.[29] In some cases, that conflict is also attributed, at least partially, to the persecution that the Peronist government began three years later against Sampay and that led him into exile.[29]

When the military dictatorship that overthrew the constitutional government in 1955 "proclaimed" the abolition of the Constitution of 1949, Raúl Scalabrini Ortiz, in an article titled "Article 40 Is the Bastion of the Republic", argued that the sole reason for abolishing the so-called Peronist Constitution was to repeal Article 40.[40]

Sampay recounts in his book Constitución y pueblo that "political parties with popular roots" attempted to reinstate Article 40 during the 1957 Constituent Convention convened by the dictatorship, but when "the initiative gained the support of the majority of the drafting committee... the Convention dissolved in an instant".[41]

Article 40 was used as a precedent by Uruguay in 1967 and by Chile in 1971 to establish rules on the expropriation of companies and the nationalization of public services.[43]

Repeal and historical consequences

[edit]
Proclamation of 27 April 1956 (operative part).

After the September 1955 coup d'état in Argentina (Revolución Libertadora), the military junta ordered the closure of the National Congress, the removal of the members of the Supreme Court and of provincial, municipal, and university authorities, and also placed the entire judiciary "in commission".[44][45] The Constitution was repealed by a military proclamation dated 27 April 1956, invoking the "exercise of revolutionary powers", signed by dictator Pedro Eugenio Aramburu and other persons usurping positions of power.[46]

At the end of the Constituent Convention of 1957, and already without a quorum, the socialist delegate Alfredo Palacios spoke the following words:

Those who have left will be responsible before the people and before history. For today, the repudiation of this Assembly and of their own colleagues is enough; a terrible repudiation, Mr. President.[47]

Assessments and characterizations

[edit]

For Germán Bidart Campos, it "sought to restore the identity between practice and the written constitution, giving a statute consistent with the new doctrine defended by the head of state".[48]

Within the current of negative assessment of the Argentine Constitution of 1949, Gabriel Negretto considers it an archetype of constitutional populism in Latin America.[49]

Luis Oviedo of the Workers' Party, of Trotskyist ideology, also expressed a negative assessment, describing it as "the codification of bourgeois nationalism", clerical and historically ineffective. According to Oviedo, Article 32 also constituted an "ideological regimentation of state workers".[50]

Conversely, jurist Eugenio Zaffaroni, former justice of the Supreme Court, carried out an extensive analysis praising the Constitution of 1949 as part of "a generous constitutionalism as a project for a better humanity" and harshly criticized the violence unleashed by the Revolución Libertadora for having wanted to "erase it from history. The sin did not consist in criticizing or objecting to it, but in seeking to erase it. For the first time in national history, a decree issued in the exercise of supposed revolutionary powers repealed a national Constitution and provincial constitutions, far exceeding its merely factual meaning to acquire the dimension of an attempt to break time. Other aberrations had been committed—and not few—but this one transcends its own immediate scope and casts its ominous shadow over the following decades".[51]

The rector of the National University of Tres de Febrero and Peronist politician Eduardo Jozami analyzes in detail the social and economic advances of the Constitution of 1949, such as the social function of property, social justice, the prohibition of abuse of rights, the rights of workers, the family, old age, education, and culture, and questions its annulment "behind the people's back... by a 1956 decree-law of the government of the 'Revolución Libertadora' (which) annulled the constitution (which had received the massive approval of the people), restoring the validity of that of 1853" and "legalized Argentine dependency on international centers".[52]

Confirming the progressive content of the Constitution of 1949, jurist and 1994 constituent convention delegate for the Socialist Party Guillermo Estévez Boero (1930–2000) emphasized the need for the Constitution and the law to be democratic and to express the interests of the people and not those of minorities represented by "specialists in constitutional law", calling on citizens to participate in constitutional reforms by presenting "projects, the unions, the neighborhood organizations, which can take as a basis the Constitution of 1949, the most advanced our homeland has known to date".[53]

Raúl Scalabrini Ortiz wrote an article in 1956 titled "Article 40 Is the Bastion of the Republic", in which he denounced the dictatorship's intention to repeal the Constitution of 1949 and "leave the country in a state of horde". In that article, Scalabrini argued that the real reason for the dictatorship to repeal the Constitution was Article 40, even though none of its authorities mentioned that reason in their statements: "Article 40 is a true wall that defends us from foreign advances and is hindering and delaying the planned subjugation and indebtedness of the Argentine economy... The hidden issue lies in Article 40".[54]

Constitutionalist Roberto Lopresti defined the Constitution of 1949 as "the highest legal institute produced by the representation of the people in Argentina", repealed by a "coup de force of the anti-homeland";[55]

Jurist Francisco Pestanha considers that "the constitutional reform of 1949 came to promote a Copernican change";[56]

Sociologist Aritz Recalde considers that the Constitution of 1949 "translated into the country's institutional order the aspirations of the free organizations of the people, which were silenced and persecuted for decades", also emphasizing the totalitarian decision of the military dictatorship to repeal it by proclamation, unleashing in the following decades a degree of violence that nearly reached "civil war" and generated a society with deep inequalities.[57]

Constitutionalist Daniel M. Rudi emphasizes social justice in assessing that "the arsenal of historical rights of working men and women gathered by the constitutional code of 1949 is a corollary of the general principle of social justice".[58]

Bibliography

[edit]
  • CARNOTA, Walter (2001). Curso de Derecho Constitucional [Course of Constitutional Law]. Buenos Aires: La Ley.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • LÚDER, Ítalo A. (1949). El principio democrático en la Constitución [The Democratic Principle in the Constitution]. La Plata: Biblioteca Laboremus.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • PALACIOS, Alfredo (1958). El pensamiento socialista en la Convención Nacional de 1957 [Socialist Thought in the 1957 National Convention]. Buenos Aires.
  • RAJLAND, Beatriz (1999). "Los valores del constitucionalismo social" [The Values of Social Constitutionalism]. Los valores en la Constitución Argentina [Values in the Argentine Constitution]. Buenos Aires: Ediar. ISBN 950-574-126-X.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • SAMPAY, Arturo E. (1974). Constitución y Pueblo [Constitution and People]. Buenos Aires: Cuenca.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • LOPRESTI, Roberto P. (1998). Constitución Argentina Comentada [Annotated Argentine Constitution]. Buenos Aires: Unilat. ISBN 987-96049-3-8.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • SANTOS MARTÍNEZ, Pedro (1976). "La Constitución "justicialista"" [The "Justicialist" Constitution]. La nueva argentina [The New Argentina]. Buenos Aires: La Bastilla.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • SEGOVIA, Juan Fernando (2005). El peronismo y la Constitución de 1949 en la crisis de legitimidad argentina [Peronism and the 1949 Constitution in the Argentine Legitimacy Crisis]. Vol. Anales. Academia Nacional de Ciencias Morales y Políticas. (Artículo completo) consultado 29-abr-2006.
  • VANOSSI, Jorge Reinaldo (1994). El Estado de Derecho en el Constitucionalismo Social [The Rule of Law in Social Constitutionalism]. Buenos Aires: EUDEBA.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  • VANOSSI, Jorge Reinaldo (2005). La Constitución Nacional de 1949 [The National Constitution of 1949]. Vol. Anales. Academia Nacional de Ciencias Morales y Políticas. (Artículo completo) consultado 29-abr-2006.
  • TERROBA, Luis Alberto. La Constituciòn de 1949. Una Causa Nacional [The 1949 Constitution: A National Cause]. Ediciones del Pilar (2003-Sold out); Editorial Ross (2nd. Ed. 2010).

References

[edit]
  1. Del Mazo, Gabriel (1955). El radicalismo. Notas sobre su historia y doctrina (1922-1952) [Radicalism: Notes on Its History and Doctrine (1922–1952)]. Buenos Aires: Raigal. pp. 285–286.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  2. Emiliani, Rafael (1931). Bases para la reforma de la Constitución Argentina [Bases for the Reform of the Argentine Constitution]. Buenos Aires: Baloné.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  3. Amadeo, Rómulo (1936). Hacia una nueva Constitución Nacional [Toward a New National Constitution]. Buenos Aires: López.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  4. 1 2 3 Segovia, Juan Fernando (2005). "El peronismo y la Constitución de 1949 en la crisis de legitimidad argentina" [Peronism and the 1949 Constitution in Argentina's Crisis of Legitimacy] (PDF). Academia Nacional de Ciencias Morales y Políticas. Anales (2005).
  5. https://carasycaretas.org.ar/2024/04/13/la-mas-profunda-reforma
  6. OIT. "Preámbulo de la Constitución de la OIT" [Preamble of the Constitution of the ILO]. OIT. Archived from the original on 10 January 2008. Retrieved 7 January 2008.
  7. Linares Quintana, Segundo V. (1979). Las nuevas constituciones del mundo [The New Constitutions of the World]. Buenos Aires: Plus Ultra.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  8. Rudi, Daniel M. (1974). Los derechos constituciones del trabajador [The Constitutional Rights of the Worker]. Buenos Aires: EUDEBA.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  9. 1 2 3 Sampay, Arturo Enrique (1974). Constitución y pueblo [Constitution and People]. Buenos Aires: Cuenca.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link)
  10. 1 2 Cruz, Paulo Márcio; Xavier, Grazielle (2007). "O Estado de Bem-Estar" [The Welfare State]. Revista de Doutrina da 4ª Região. Edição 21 (19-12-2007). ISSN 1980-458X.
  11. Palacios, Alfredo (1954). "La justicia social" [Social Justice]. Buenos Aires: Claridad.
  12. Mecle, Elina and Fernández, Beatriz. La Justicia Social Hoy: un dilema. Proyectos de investigación "Reforma Constitucional, Poder Político, Justicia Social y Políticas Sociales 1949-1994." "Políticas Sociales y Democracia en el Neoliberalismo, Argentina en la década de los ´90". UBA. Secretaría de Ciencia y Técnica. "...En América Latina, el desarrollo de la Justicia Social, surgirá de un movimiento regional, político y altamente movilizador conocido con el nombre de Populismo; el nuevo Estado Populista, acompañado por los movimientos obreros del siglo XX, se convertirá en una fuerza política decisiva que, aliado con algunos sectores de las clases medias y de la burguesía industrial le disputarán al Estado oligárquico su papel hegemónico...."
  13. "Populista". Diccionario de la Real Academia Española. Real Academia Española. 2014. Retrieved 27 February 2015. populista.1. adj. Perteneciente o relativo al pueblo. Partido populista.
  14. Bueno, Gustavo (June 2006). "Notas sobre el concepto de populismo". El Catoblepas (53). Nódulo. Retrieved 27 February 2015. The term 'populism' is used with a marked ideological sense, especially when it is used not as a neutral descriptive theoretical term but as an axiological, evaluative term, and particularly with a pejorative or negative connotation.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  15. Sartino, Julieta (2013). "El fenómeno del populismo: recorridos 'otros'" (PDF). Identidades (53). ISSN 2250-5369. Retrieved 27 February 2015. To this end, it is important to dismantle the totalizing, universalizing claim that imposes the idea that we can refer to populism, and even more seriously, label this or that movement as populist detached from its historical particularities, its sources, its conditions, its patterns of formation, which ultimately give each of the movements characterized as populist their specific character.
  16. Escudero, Laura. In Manuel Alcántara Sáez and Flavia Freindenberg (eds.), Partidos políticos de América Latina: Cono Sur. Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 2001, p. 72.
  17. Sarrabayrouse, Eugenio C. (July–December 2015). "El Derecho penal del primer peronismo y los fusilamientos de junio de 1956" [Criminal Law of Early Peronism and the Executions of June 1956] (PDF). Revista de Historia del Derecho (50). Buenos Aires: INHIDE: 131–226.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  18. 1 2 "Expediente 1460-D-1948" (PDF). Honorable Cámara de Diputados de la Nación Argentina. 13 August 1948. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 November 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2021.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  19. "Expediente 1466-D-1948" (PDF). Honorable Cámara de Diputados de la Nación Argentina. 13 August 1948. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 November 2021. Retrieved 24 November 2021.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  20. Constitución de 1949 – Javier Azzali, El constitucionalismo popular en Argentina, ISBN 978-987-4465-15-3, Buenos Aires, 2019.
  21. 1 2 Gentile, Jorge Horacio. "La interpretación acerca de los dos tercios" [The Interpretation of the Two-Thirds Requirement]. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba.
  22. Brauner Rodgers, Susana. "El nacionalismo yrigoyenista (1930-1943)" [Yrigoyenist Nationalism (1930–1943)]. Instituto Yrigoyeneano. Archived from the original on 2026-04-17. Retrieved 2026-04-30.
  23. http://www.saij.gob.ar/jose-ignacio-lopez-legalidad-legitimidad-constitucion-nacional-1949-enfoque-historico-dacf120169-2012-09-18/123456789-0abc-defg9610-21fcanirtcod
  24. González Arzac, Alberto R. "La constitución de 1949" [The Constitution of 1949]. Mágicas Ruinas.
  25. Bidart Campos cited in Ziulu Adolfo Gabino, Derecho Constitucional, Vol. I, Depalma, Buenos Aires, 1997, pp. 58–59
  26. Gentile, Jorge Horacio. "La interpretación de los dos tercios" [The Interpretation of the Two-Thirds Requirement]. Archived from the original on 2007-03-12. Retrieved 2026-04-30.
  27. The cases "Comercial Staudt" (Fallos, 229:368, 1954), "Eléctrica del Norte" (Fallos, 224:706, 1952), "Banco Nación" (Fallos, 226:408, 1953), "Oleaginosa Cipo" (Fallos, 226:453, 1953), "Goodyear" (Fallos, 229:456, 1954), and "Torrá" (Fallos, 232:134, 1955) apply the principles on abuse of rights and the social function of property established in the 1949 constitutional reform. In the case "San Miguel" (Fallos, 216:606, 1950), the 1949 Constitution was applied to accept an action for amparo.
  28. 1 2 Diario de Sesiones de la Convención Nacional Constituyente [Journal of Sessions of the National Constituent Convention] (PDF). Tomo I. Buenos Aires: Imprenta del Congreso de la Nación. 1949. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-09-12. Retrieved 2026-04-30.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  29. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Madaria, Edgardo (2012). "El aporte socialcristiano al constitucionalismo social en la etapa peronista: los doctores Arturo Sampay y Pablo Ramella" [The Social Christian Contribution to Social Constitutionalism in the Peronist Era: Arturo Sampay and Pablo Ramella]. In Camusso, Marcelo Pablo; López, Ignacio Alejandro; Orfali, María Marta (eds.). Doscientos años del humanismo cristiano en la Argentina [Two Hundred Years of Christian Humanism in Argentina]. Universidad Católica Argentina. pp. 525–567. ISBN 9789876202206.
  30. "Copia archivada". Archived from the original on 16 April 2016. Retrieved 23 April 2016.
  31. 1 2 Tripolone, Gerardo. "La defensa nacional en la Constitución de 1949" [National Defense in the 1949 Constitution] (PDF). Revista de Historia del Derecho No. 59, January–June 2020 (online version). Buenos Aires (Argentina): Instituto de Investigaciones de Historia del Derecho. ISSN 1853-1784.
  32. Regolo, S. (2012). Hacia una democracia de masas. Aproximaciones histórico-sociológicas a la reforma constitucional de 1949. Buenos Aires.
  33. Rosa, José María (1936). "La soberanía Argentina y la libre navegación de los ríos" [Argentine Sovereignty and the Free Navigation of Rivers]. Boletín del Instituto de Estudios Federalistas. May 1939 (1). Archived from the original on 31 October 2007.
  34. "El juicio por jurados en Argentina" [Trial by Jury in Argentina] (PDF). November 2000. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 December 2021. Retrieved 4 December 2021.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  35. "Se aprobó la Ley de Juicio por Jurados para la Ciudad de Buenos Aires" [The Jury Trial Law for the City of Buenos Aires Was Approved]. 30 September 2021. Retrieved 4 December 2021.
  36. Migliorini, Inés Candelaria (21–25 August 1972). "Los derechos civiles de la mujer en la República Argentina" [The Civil Rights of Women in the Argentine Republic]. Conferencia Interamericana Especializada sobre Educación Integral de la Mujer. Buenos Aires: Ministerio de Educación.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  37. Barrancos, Dora (2007). "Los nuevos derechos civiles y reformas del Código Penal" [New Civil Rights and Reforms of the Penal Code]. Mujeres en la sociedad Argentina: Una historia de cinco siglos [Women in Argentine Society: A History of Five Centuries]. Buenos Aires: Sudamericana. ISBN 9789500728805.
  38. Gambini, Hugo: Historia del peronismo, vol. I. Buenos Aires, 1999, Editorial Planeta Argentina S.A. ISBN complete work 950-49-0226-X, Vol. I 950-49-0227-8, p. 221.
  39. La huelga, expression of conflict, by Enrique Osvaldo Rodríguez, published in Perfil, 26 April 2015.
  40. 1 2 Scalabrini Ortiz, Raúl (1965). "El artículo 40 es el bastión de la República" [Article 40 Is the Bastion of the Republic]. Bases para la Reconstrucción Nacional [Bases for National Reconstruction]. Buenos Aires: Plus Ultra.
  41. 1 2 Sampay, Arturo E. (1974). Constitución y Pueblo [Constitution and People]. Buenos Aires: Cuenca. pp. 186–187.
  42. Text of Article 40 of the Constitution of 1949.
    The organization of wealth and its exploitation have as their purpose the welfare of the people, within an economic order in accordance with the principles of social justice. The State, by law, may intervene in the economy and monopolize a given activity, in safeguarding the general interests and within the limits set by the fundamental rights guaranteed in this Constitution. Except for imports and exports, which shall be under the responsibility of the State, in accordance with the limitations and regime determined by law, all economic activity shall be organized according to free private initiative, provided that its ostensible or concealed purpose is not to dominate national markets, eliminate competition, or usuriously increase profits.
    Minerals, waterfalls, oil, coal and gas deposits, and other natural sources of energy, except plants, are imprescriptible and inalienable property of the Nation, with the corresponding participation in their proceeds to be agreed upon with the provinces.
    Public services originally belong to the State and under no circumstances may be transferred or granted for exploitation. Those in private hands shall be transferred to the State, by purchase or expropriation with prior compensation, when national law so determines.
    The price for the expropriation of companies holding public service concessions shall be the original cost of the assets used for exploitation, less the sums amortized during the period elapsed since the concession was granted and the surpluses over a reasonable profit, which shall also be considered reimbursement of invested capital.
  43. 1 2 Pérez Zavala, Carlos (2006). "Bienes de producción y recursos naturales en la teoría constitucionalista de Arturo Sampay" [Production Goods and Natural Resources in Arturo Sampay's Constitutional Theory]. In Biagini, Hugo Edgardo; Roig, Arturo Andrés (eds.). El pensamiento alternativo en la Argentina del siglo XX: Obrerismo, vanguardia, justicia social (1930-1960) [Alternative Thought in Twentieth-Century Argentina: Workerism, Vanguard, Social Justice (1930–1960)]. Vol. II. Biblos. p. 175. ISBN 9507864091.
  44. Los mitos de la historia argentina 5, Felipe Pigna, p. 13, ISBN 9789504932116 – Topic: Argentine history.
  45. Decree 415 of 6 October 1955 ordered the removal of all members of the Supreme Court of Argentina.
  46. Anales de Legislación Argentina [Annals of Argentine Legislation]. Vol. XVI–A. Buenos Aires. 1956. p. 1.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  47. Palacios, Alfredo (1958). El pensamiento socialista en la Convención Nacional de 1957 [Socialist Thought in the 1957 National Convention]. Buenos Aires. p. 200.
  48. Bidart Campos, Germán. Derecho Constitucional. Vol. I. Ediar. Buenos Aires. 1964. p. 196.
  49. Negretto, Gabriel N. "El Populismo Constitucional en América Latina. Reflexiones Sobre la Constitución Argentina de 1949." De Cádiz al siglo XXI. Adriana Luna Fabritius, Pablo Mijangos and Rafael Rojas (coord.). Mexico City: Taurus, 2012, p. 343 ff.
  50. Oviedo, Luis (4 May 2006). "Mario Cafiero y la Constitución de 1949" [Mario Cafiero and the Constitution of 1949]. Partido Obrero. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 1 May 2026.
  51. Eugenio Zaffaroni, foreword to Constitución de la Nación Argentina 1949 [Constitution of the Argentine Nation, 1949] (PDF). Secretaría de Derechos Humanos de la Nación. 2010.
  52. Jozami, Aníbal. "La Constitución de 1949" [The Constitution of 1949]. Ruinas Digitales. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 1 May 2026.
  53. Estévez Boero, Guillermo (13 August 1974). Una Constitución para la Liberación Nacional [A Constitution for National Liberation]. Partido Socialista Popular.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: year (link)
  54. Scalabrini Ortiz, Raúl (1965). "El artículo 40 es bastión de la República" [Article 40 Is the Bastion of the Republic]. Bases para la reconstrucción nacional [Bases for National Reconstruction]. Plus Ultra. pp. 31–33.
  55. Roberto Lopresti, foreword to González Arzac, Alberto (2014). La constitución justicialista de 1949 [The Justicialist Constitution of 1949]. Fabro.
  56. Pestanha, Francisco José (12 September 2011). "Algunos interrogantes sobre la representatividad" [Some Questions on Representativeness]. Rebanadas de Realidad. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 3 March 2015.
  57. Recalde, Aritz (30 January 2009). "60 años de la Constitución Argentina de 1949" [60 Years of the Argentine Constitution of 1949]. Espacio para la formación de una Sociología Nacional. Retrieved 3 March 2015.
  58. Rudi, Daniel M. (1974). Los derechos constitucionales del trabajador [The Constitutional Rights of the Worker]. Buenos Aires: Eudeba. p. 7.
[edit]