Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Bandera, M., (2016). La ponderación de bienes jurídicos y el principio de proporcionalidad. [Tesis, Universidad Andina del Cusco]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12557/633
Bandera, M., La ponderación de bienes jurídicos y el principio de proporcionalidad. [Tesis]. : Universidad Andina del Cusco; 2016. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12557/633
@misc{renati/18246,
title = "La ponderación de bienes jurídicos y el principio de proporcionalidad.",
author = "Bandera Serrano, María Teresa",
publisher = "Universidad Andina del Cusco",
year = "2016"
}
Title: La ponderación de bienes jurídicos y el principio de proporcionalidad.
Authors(s): Bandera Serrano, María Teresa
Advisor(s): Aguilar Kalla, Enrique
Keywords: Proporcionalidad; Delitos; Violencia; Lesiones
Issue Date: 22-Dec-2016
Institution: Universidad Andina del Cusco
Abstract: Platón decía, la peor forma de injusticia es la justicia simulada. En así que el problema del trabajo de investigación versa sobre la proporcionalidad de las penas impuestas para los delitos de lesiones por violencia familiar y el delito de violencia contra la autoridad para impedir el ejercicio de sus funciones por parte del Juez, ello en razón a la deficiente motivación del nivel de afectación o puesta en peligro del bien jurídico que cautelan dichos tipos penales.
Asimismo la imposición por parte de los Jueces de penas privativas de libertad en los delitos de lesiones por violencia familiar, ya sea graves o leves, suspendidas en su ejecución amparada en el Articulo 57 del Código Penal, sin embargo debido a que en muchas de las sentencias analizadas en la muestra revelan que el Juez no toma en consideración la naturaleza ni la modalidad del hecho punible y además hace una doble valoración de las atenuantes con el objetivo de encajar el margen punitivo en el Artículo 57 para imponer penas suspendidas en su ejecución, dejando de lado la valoración de la afectación o puesta en peligro del bien jurídico tutelado por el tipo penal de lesiones por violencia familiar .
Es así que se recopilo todas las sentencias emitidas de los tipos penales de lesiones graves y leves por violencia familiar contra la mujer y el tipo penal de violencia contra la autoridad para impedir el ejercicio de sus funciones correspondientes al periodo del año 2015 al 2016 y haciendo el análisis de las misma ha verificado que en relación al tipo ilícito especifico de lesiones graves y leves por violencia familiar, el Juez no valora los hechos ni la modalidad del hecho punible así como tampoco se hace una idónea valoración del bien jurídico para tomarlo como referencia al momento de imponer la pena y en muchos casos, se menciona tan solo cual es el bien jurídico sin la debida argumentación y/o motivación de la misma, por lo que simplemente se emplean figuras procesales como la conclusión anticipada y no se toma en cuenta la gravedad de los hechos respecto a la afectación al bien jurídico protegido, precisando que es en base a la protección de bienes jurídicos, es que se ha fundamentado la tipificación de los ilícitos en nuestro Código Penal, además el Juez incurre en una doble valoración de las atenuantes que ya habría realizado el Ministerio Publico, ello en razón, al afán del Juez de imponer penas suspendidas en su ejecución.
Esta falta de motivación o argumentación jurídica en relación a la valoración de los bienes Jurídicos vulnerados por la comisión de un delito, trae como consecuencia la existencia de sentencias con condenas desproporcionales, respecto al bien jurídico protegido y la gravedad de los hechos que los han lesionado o puesto en peligro, situación que se ha demostrado dentro del presente trabajo de investigación. Por lo que se concluyó que las penas impuestas por el Juez en los delitos de lesiones por violencia familiar, sea graves o leves, son desproporcionales debido a que no sobrepasan el primer nivel del test de proporcionalidad, que es la idoneidad, en razón a que el Juez no está imponiendo una sanción punitiva adecuada ya que no cumple el fin del tipo penal que es cautelar el bien jurídico, debido a que el Juez no valoro la afectación o puesta en peligro del bien jurídico.
Platón said, the worst form of injustice is simulated justice. In this way, the problem of the research work is related to the proportionality of the penalties imposed for the crimes of injuries by family violence and the crime of violence against the authority to prevent the exercise of its functions by the Judge, due to the Deficient motivation of the level of affectation or endangerment of the juridical asset that protects said criminal types. Likewise, the imposition by the Judges of custodial sentences on the crimes of family violence injuries, whether serious or minor, suspended in their execution covered by Article 57 of the Criminal Code, however, because in many of the The judgments analyzed in the sample reveal that the Judge does not take into consideration the nature and the modality of the punishable act and also makes a double valuation of the attenuating ones with the objective of fitting the punitive margin in Article 57 to impose suspended penalties in its execution, Leaving aside the assessment of the affectation or endangerment of the legal asset protected by the criminal type of injuries caused by family violence. Thus, all sentences issued for the types of serious and minor injuries caused by family violence against women and the penal type of violence against the authority to prevent the exercise of their functions for the period from 2015 to 2016 are collected and The analysis of the same has verified that in relation to the specific illicit type of serious and minor injuries due to family violence, the Judge does not value the facts or the modality of the punishable act nor does it make an appropriate valuation of the legal good to take it as a reference At the time of imposing the penalty and in many cases, it only mentions what the legal good is without proper argumentation and/or motivation, so that procedural figures are used as the anticipated conclusion and is not taken into account The seriousness of the facts regarding the effect on the protected legal right, stating that it is based on the protection of legal rights, is that it has been based on the definition of illicit in our Penal Code, in addition the Judge incurs a double assessment of The mitigating factors that the Public Ministry would have already done, due to the judge's eagerness to impose suspended sentences on his execution. This lack of motivation or legal argument in relation to the assessment of the legal goods infringed by the commission of a crime, results in the existence of sentences with disproportionate sentences, with respect to the protected legal good and the seriousness of thefacts that have injured them Or endangered, a situation that has been demonstrated within the present research work. Therefore, it was concluded that the sentences imposed by the Judge in the crimes of family violence injuries, whether serious or minor, are disproportionate because they do not exceed the first level of the proportionality test, which is suitability, because The Judge is not imposing an appropriate punitive sanction since it does not fulfill the purpose of the criminal type that is to protect the legal good, because the judge did not value the affectation or endangerment of the legal good.
Platón said, the worst form of injustice is simulated justice. In this way, the problem of the research work is related to the proportionality of the penalties imposed for the crimes of injuries by family violence and the crime of violence against the authority to prevent the exercise of its functions by the Judge, due to the Deficient motivation of the level of affectation or endangerment of the juridical asset that protects said criminal types. Likewise, the imposition by the Judges of custodial sentences on the crimes of family violence injuries, whether serious or minor, suspended in their execution covered by Article 57 of the Criminal Code, however, because in many of the The judgments analyzed in the sample reveal that the Judge does not take into consideration the nature and the modality of the punishable act and also makes a double valuation of the attenuating ones with the objective of fitting the punitive margin in Article 57 to impose suspended penalties in its execution, Leaving aside the assessment of the affectation or endangerment of the legal asset protected by the criminal type of injuries caused by family violence. Thus, all sentences issued for the types of serious and minor injuries caused by family violence against women and the penal type of violence against the authority to prevent the exercise of their functions for the period from 2015 to 2016 are collected and The analysis of the same has verified that in relation to the specific illicit type of serious and minor injuries due to family violence, the Judge does not value the facts or the modality of the punishable act nor does it make an appropriate valuation of the legal good to take it as a reference At the time of imposing the penalty and in many cases, it only mentions what the legal good is without proper argumentation and/or motivation, so that procedural figures are used as the anticipated conclusion and is not taken into account The seriousness of the facts regarding the effect on the protected legal right, stating that it is based on the protection of legal rights, is that it has been based on the definition of illicit in our Penal Code, in addition the Judge incurs a double assessment of The mitigating factors that the Public Ministry would have already done, due to the judge's eagerness to impose suspended sentences on his execution. This lack of motivation or legal argument in relation to the assessment of the legal goods infringed by the commission of a crime, results in the existence of sentences with disproportionate sentences, with respect to the protected legal good and the seriousness of thefacts that have injured them Or endangered, a situation that has been demonstrated within the present research work. Therefore, it was concluded that the sentences imposed by the Judge in the crimes of family violence injuries, whether serious or minor, are disproportionate because they do not exceed the first level of the proportionality test, which is suitability, because The Judge is not imposing an appropriate punitive sanction since it does not fulfill the purpose of the criminal type that is to protect the legal good, because the judge did not value the affectation or endangerment of the legal good.
Link to repository: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12557/633
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Universidad Andina del Cusco. Facultad de Derecho y Ciencia Política
Grade or title: Abogado
Register date: 3-Mar-2017
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.