Análisis jurisprudencial de la incorporación de la prueba pericial en el proceso penal colombiano
Cargando...
Fecha
2024
Autores
Espindola Nausa, Alejandro
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Ediciones Universidad Simón Bolívar
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Resumen
En Colombia el pleno ejercicio de incorporación de la prueba pericial dentro del proceso penal ha representado un reto significativo para los administradores de justicia, en cuanto a los parámetros para la identificación de la fiabilidad, la idoneidad y la capacidad intelectual del perito al momento de hacer efectiva la inclusión de su informe pericial como prueba relevante en el análisis realizado por el juez de cara a la solución del proceso judicial.
La prueba pericial es un componente esencial del proceso penal en Colombia, representa un papel fundamental para la búsqueda de principios judiciales como lo son la verdad y la justicia, en Colombia tras la implementación del sistema acusatorio en el marco de la Ley 906 de 2004, el desarrollo de la actividad probatoria ha tomado importante relevancia, y esto debido a la incorporación de la prueba pericial como medio de prueba, situación que ha permitido un ejercicio efectivo de interpretación y ponderación probatoria por parte de los administradores de justicia.
El artículo analiza la jurisprudencia relacionada con la prueba pericial en el contexto colombiano, tomando como referentes comparativos antecedentes en México y Ecuador, destacando los desafíos que se presentan en la aplicación judicial en estos países, además se exploran los antecedentes internacionales que han tenido influencia en la inclusión de la prueba pericial en el sistema penal colombiano, como lo es el modelo estadounidense que reconoce la prueba pericial como un medio efectivo para resolver conflictos judiciales.
Si bien en Colombia existe un desarrollo normativo que establece principios claros y garantistas frente a la valoración probatoria por parte de los jueces, no se desconocen los obstáculos presentes en el ejercicio judicial, situación que puede representar una afectación a los principios constitucionales y procesales como lo son el debido proceso y el acceso a la justicia; en el país la Honorable Corte Constitucional y la Honorable Corte Suprema de Justicia han abordado desde el ejercicio de control jurisdiccional los diversos conflictos que han surgido con relación al ejercicio probatorio dentro del proceso penal y han plasmado en providencia, los lineamientos para una correcta administración de justicia.
El estudio se propone examinar cómo los administradores de justicia valoran la prueba pericial, los criterios utilizados para su admisión y las implicaciones de estas prácticas para el debido proceso y la justicia penal. A través de este análisis, se busca identificar propuestas que fortalezcan la implementación adecuada de la prueba pericial, promoviendo un sistema de justicia más justo, equitativo y eficiente en Colombia.
In Colombia, the full exercise of incorporating expert evidence within the criminal process has posed a significant challenge for justice administrators, regarding the parameters for identifying the reliability, suitability, and intellectual capacity of the expert at the moment of effectively including their expert report as relevant evidence in the analysis conducted by the judge in relation to the resolution of the judicial process. The expert testimony is an essential component of the criminal process in Colombia; it plays a fundamental role in the pursuit of judicial principles such as truth and justice. In Colombia, following the implementation of the accusatory system under Law 906 of 2004, the development of evidentiary activity has gained significant importance. This is due to the incorporation of expert testimony as a means of evidence, a situation that has allowed for an effective exercise of interpretation and evaluation of evidence by the administrators of justice. The article analyzes the case law related to expert evidence in the Colombian context, using comparative references from Mexico and Ecuador, highlighting the challenges that arise in judicial application in these countries. Additionally, it explores the international precedents that have influenced the inclusion of expert evidence in the Colombian criminal system, such as the American model, which recognizes expert evidence as an effective means for resolving judicial conflicts. While Colombia has a regulatory development that establishes clear and protective principles regarding the evaluation of evidence by judges, the obstacles present in judicial practice are not overlooked. This situation can affect constitutional and procedural principles such as due process and access to justice. In the country, the Honorable Constitutional Court and the Honorable Supreme Court of Justice have addressed, through judicial control, the various conflicts that have arisen concerning the evidentiary process within criminal proceedings and have outlined in their rulings the guidelines for the proper administration of justice. The study aims to examine how justice administrators assess expert evidence, the criteria used for its admission, and the implications of these practices for due process and criminal justice. Through this analysis, the aim is to identify proposals that strengthen the proper implementation of expert testimony, promoting a justice system that is fairer, more equitable, and efficient in Colombia.
In Colombia, the full exercise of incorporating expert evidence within the criminal process has posed a significant challenge for justice administrators, regarding the parameters for identifying the reliability, suitability, and intellectual capacity of the expert at the moment of effectively including their expert report as relevant evidence in the analysis conducted by the judge in relation to the resolution of the judicial process. The expert testimony is an essential component of the criminal process in Colombia; it plays a fundamental role in the pursuit of judicial principles such as truth and justice. In Colombia, following the implementation of the accusatory system under Law 906 of 2004, the development of evidentiary activity has gained significant importance. This is due to the incorporation of expert testimony as a means of evidence, a situation that has allowed for an effective exercise of interpretation and evaluation of evidence by the administrators of justice. The article analyzes the case law related to expert evidence in the Colombian context, using comparative references from Mexico and Ecuador, highlighting the challenges that arise in judicial application in these countries. Additionally, it explores the international precedents that have influenced the inclusion of expert evidence in the Colombian criminal system, such as the American model, which recognizes expert evidence as an effective means for resolving judicial conflicts. While Colombia has a regulatory development that establishes clear and protective principles regarding the evaluation of evidence by judges, the obstacles present in judicial practice are not overlooked. This situation can affect constitutional and procedural principles such as due process and access to justice. In the country, the Honorable Constitutional Court and the Honorable Supreme Court of Justice have addressed, through judicial control, the various conflicts that have arisen concerning the evidentiary process within criminal proceedings and have outlined in their rulings the guidelines for the proper administration of justice. The study aims to examine how justice administrators assess expert evidence, the criteria used for its admission, and the implications of these practices for due process and criminal justice. Through this analysis, the aim is to identify proposals that strengthen the proper implementation of expert testimony, promoting a justice system that is fairer, more equitable, and efficient in Colombia.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Prueba pericial, Perito, Idoneidad, Debido proceso
