Our Office

Calle 10 A # 34 11 Hotel Diez Categoría, office 4014

WhatsApp

+57 318 5324130

FAILURE TO PROCESS CLAIMS – PREVARICATO?

For some years now, the Superintendence of Industry and Commerce has been deliberately not processing certain investigations proposed by consumers throughout the country, considering that they lack the social or economic relevance necessary for their study or that they do not meet certain higher purposes that the entity intends to protect.
Now, I consider it necessary to judge whether or not the activity carried out by the highest authority in the field of consumer law is correct, taking into account that such acts result directly and almost unfailingly in the lack of protection of the constitutional rights that cover us all and that have their main basis in Article 78 of the Political Constitution of Colombia.
In pursuit of the above, let us review the argument that we find in the resolutions of the entity that are presented as a short argument that does not have sufficient support to motivate judicial or administrative rulings, which serve to stop investigating a wide variety of violations of consumer law.
This argument comes from an analogical exercise carried out by the authority, according to which, its power and mandate, in matters of consumer law is the same that it has in terms of competition law, so it intends to apply the provisions on the subject found in Articles 2 of Decree 2153 of 1992 and 3 of Law 1340 of 2009, which dictate that the Superintendency is who decides which cases are significant and authorize it to investigate only on these.
We consider such exercise to be totally distant from a proper legal hermeneutics, since the aforementioned rules are clearly covered by the principle of specialty, that is, they were issued by the legislator with the exclusive purpose of regulating a single chapter of the law of markets, known as competition law, whose purpose is nothing more than the protection of the right to compete in a market; while the regime enshrined in the consumer statute (law 1480 of 2011 and other provisions), regulates another different chapter of the same set, which is diametrically opposed to competition, whose purpose is to protect the weaker party of the consumer relationship, that is, the consumer, which is covered by other principles and rules.
Therefore, I believe that the growing tendency of the Superintendency to refuse to investigate certain consumer cases, using the argument that they are not significant, rather than leading to the efficiency of the law, could generate an open prevarication (issuing resolutions manifestly contrary to the law), a fact that affects the image of the entity, could lead to criminal or disciplinary liability for its officials and distances us from a solid institution that takes ownership of consumer affairs, which should be characterized by being technical or disciplinary for its officials, This fact, which affects the image of the entity, could lead to criminal or disciplinary liabilities for its officials and distances us from a solid institution that takes care of consumer affairs, which should be characterized by being technical, guaranteeing and judicious in the application of the rules of the game set by the state.
Finally, we hope that the superintendency reviews this ideological position, that it becomes aware that its actions may be causing harm to consumers and that after doing so it is once again the target of the respect and admiration deserved by a body that has made such great advances for economic law in our country.
Credit: www.larepublica.co
Author: Santiago Pinzón

Scroll to Top