Bibliographic citations
Garcia, P., (2024). Informe jurídico sobre Pleno Sentencia 307/2023 perteneciente al Informe sobre Expediente N°00004-2022- PCC/TC “Caso de la cuestión de confianza y su rechazo de plano” [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28658
Garcia, P., Informe jurídico sobre Pleno Sentencia 307/2023 perteneciente al Informe sobre Expediente N°00004-2022- PCC/TC “Caso de la cuestión de confianza y su rechazo de plano” []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/28658
@misc{renati/534019,
title = "Informe jurídico sobre Pleno Sentencia 307/2023 perteneciente al Informe sobre Expediente N°00004-2022- PCC/TC “Caso de la cuestión de confianza y su rechazo de plano”",
author = "Garcia Oviedo, Paul Gabriel",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2024"
}
The case addresses a dispute between the Congress of the Republic of Peru and the Executive Branch, initiated when the Prime Minister, Aníbal Torres Vásquez, raised a vote of confidence related to Bill 3570/2022-PE. The main issue revolves around whether this vote of confidence constituted an irregular exercise of Executive powers and undermined the constitutional powers of the Congress. Additionally, secondary issues regarding the competent authority to determine the rejection of the vote of confidence and the validity of implicit interpretations of such rejection are examined. The regulatory instruments employed include Articles 132, 133, and 134 of the Political Constitution of Peru, the Congress's regulations, Law No. 31355, which regulate the vote of confidence and its procedure. Furthermore, previous judgments of the Constitutional Court addressing the interpretation and limits of this mechanism were considered, such as Judgment 00006-2019-CC/TC, 0006-2018-PI/TC, and Judgment 00006-2003-AI/TC. The main conclusions indicate that the Executive's proposal of the vote of confidence for the approval of Bill 3570/2022-PE was irregular and violated the powers of the Congress. It is concluded that the Congress has the authority to determine the rejection of the vote of confidence, and such rejection must be explicit to avoid arbitrary interpretations. The ruling highlights the need to respect the separation of powers and the constitutional limits established to preserve the democratic balance in the country.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License