This paper starts analyzing the Constitutional Court's Eichin and Antilef cases on the scope of the competence of the military justice in Chile. In Eichin and Antilef, the Constitutional Court applied both the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights case-law. The research addresses the question of whether these cases reflect a paradigm shift in public law and of dialogue between judges. We argue that Eichin and Antilef cases are examples of a process of transition toward a new constitutional paradigm, which is essentially marked by the intensification of the dialogue between judges in human rights.