The THE ORIGINAL INDIGENOUS PEASANT JURISDICTION AND CONFLICTS WITH THE ORDINARY JURISDICTION

AN ANALYSIS FROM NATIONAL REGULATIONS AND CONSTITUTIONAL JURISPRUDENCE.

Abstract

The main objective of this research is to evaluate the extent to which the Indigenous Originary Peasant Jurisdiction (JIOC) is effectively respected and guaranteed in relation to the Ordinary Jurisdiction, within the framework of the principle of hierarchical equality enshrined in the 2009 Political Constitution of the State. In this regard, the analysis examines how the Plurinational Constitutional Court (TCP) resolves conflicts of jurisdiction arising between both systems and whether its decisions are consistent with the provisions of the Constitution and Law No. 073 on Jurisdictional Demarcation.This study is relevant insofar as the consolidation of legal pluralism represents one of the most significant advances of the contemporary Bolivian legal order, as it recognizes Indigenous Originary Peasant peoples not only as collective subjects of rights but also as holders of their own jurisdictional authority. However, the practical implementation of hierarchical equality has generated doctrinal debates and institutional tensions, particularly in scenarios where the competences of the JIOC overlap or collide with those of the ordinary jurisdiction.The research focuses on the most relevant constitutional case law, complemented by doctrinal and normative review, in order to determine whether the TCP has contributed to ensuring a harmonious coordination between both jurisdictions or whether restrictive criteria continue to limit the full exercise of the JIOC. Ultimately, this investigation seeks to contribute to a critical understanding of Bolivian plural justice, assessing its scope, challenges, and prospects within the framework of a constitutional and intercultural rule of law.