Abstract

This paper addresses the consequences of the Constitutional Court’s decision in the cases known as Rentas Vitalicias, from the point of view of the doctrine of unconstitutional constitutional reforms. First, it examines the state of the issue in the national dogmatic, with contributions from comparative law. Then, it analyzes the precedent of the Constitutional Court in the case Retiro 2 where it was decided, for the first time in Chile, the declaration of unconstitutionality of a constitutional reform. Secondly, the paper reconstructs the Court’s argument in the Rentas Vitalicias cases, focusing on the general arguments and those related to the power to declare the inapplicability of a legal rule. We argue that the Court’s decision has an impact on the understanding of the Chilean system of formal sources, on the powers of the Constitutional Court itself, on the separation of functions in matters of constitutional reforms and with respect to the rule of law in general.