Reducción de la expansión de la prisión preventiva
Being immersed in the discussion of the problems of preventive prison opens the door for a question not only technical but as a constitutional enclave. Legal criminal consequences are only constitutionally valid after facts and not after presumptions. In that sense, a problem arises when a legal con...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Spanish |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6203522 |
| Source: | Lex: Revista de la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencia Política de la Universidad Alas Peruanas, ISSN 1991-1734, Vol. 15, Nº. 20, 2017, pags. 317-338 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
Being immersed in the discussion of the problems of preventive prison opens the door for a question
not only technical but as a constitutional enclave. Legal criminal consequences are only constitutionally
valid after facts and not after presumptions. In that sense, a problem arises when a
legal consequence is applied when assessing the procedural risk considering presumptions breaking
clearly established laws. The presumptions open a non-objective expansion and facing such
expansion until finding a truly exceptional application is only achieved with a comprehensive
analysis of the procedural risk. Procedural risk cannot be assessed on the basis of assumptions but
of objectivity as stated by the law (article 268 of the Criminal Process Code) when appointing
that escape risk and obstruction of pieces of evidence should be based on background and other
circumstances. |
|---|