Análisis comparativo: la figura de la legítima defensa frente a la legitima defensa privilegiada adicionada por la ley de seguridad ciudadana
Cargando...
Fecha
2023
Autores
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
Esta investigación, cuyo objetivo es determinar la superfluidad y desaciertos de la figura de la Legitima Defensa Privilegiada en el ordenamiento jurídico colombiano, teniendo en cuenta la previa existencia de la legitima defensa en su sentido original y además su construcción como figura jurídica, se realiza un análisis comparativo de la figura de la legitima defensa original en su artículo 32 de la Ley 599 de 2000, frente a la legitima defensa privilegiada introducida por la ley 2197 de 2022 Ley de seguridad ciudadana. En virtud del objetivo principal de la investigación, se planteó una investigación de diseño descriptivo, con un enfoque de investigación cualitativo, dado en recopilar todos los datos informativos de los artículos científicos, ensayos e investigaciones académicas y el sistema jurídico penal del Estado Colombiano, para así desarrollar la respuesta a la pregunta principal de la investigación
Por esto, la importancia del reconocimiento comparativo de los requisitos que se hallan intrínsecos en la Legítima Defensa y la Legítima Defensa Privilegiada del ordenamiento jurídico colombiano, tratando de plantear un análisis comparativo entre estas dos modalidades; en el entendido de que se deben cumplir unos requisitos formales para que exista una ausencia de responsabilidad, pues si no se dan estos presupuestos, la misma no se configura y por lo tanto, la persona tendrá que pagar penalmente esa infracción. Consecuentemente, el enfoque de este proyecto pretende no solamente examinar los requisitos normativos, sino aclarar el contraste entre las dos defensas planteadas y cuestionar por qué el legislador expidió esta normatividad, con qué propósito y su fuerza normativa; puesto que, mostrando las dificultades en la implementación de esta nueva figura se sustentan
en la idea de dotar al ciudadano de seguridad y protección. En otras palabras, la intención del legislador se fundamenta en los valores de la protección y la defensa, sin embargo, su posible aplicación resulta problemática. Desde esta perspectiva, este trabajo además de plantear las distinciones dogmáticas y doctrinarias de estos dos tipos de legítima defensa, busca cuestionar críticamente la funcionalidad de la legítima defensa privilegiada.
Como resultado de la investigación, se tiene en una simple comparación, donde se puede asumir que la legítima defensa es cuando un hecho es objetivo; es decir, cuando alguien realiza un delito y la otra persona actúa en defensa personal, luego de ser agredido. Y la legitima defensa privilegiada, se da bajo un supuesto de agresión, es decir, un impulso subjetivo ante los hechos de la conducta del defensor se haya realizado al rechazar este el escalamiento. Donde lo más importante de las modificaciones introducidas a la Ley, ya en vigencia hace muchos años en diversos gobiernos, donde el privilegio refiere una opción de procedimiento legal, debido a que, nada de esto tendría efecto práctico si es que no se tradujeran en efectos positivos para el que alega la defensa en el procedimiento, y como este tendría efecto si es que no se originaran transformaciones claras y comprendidas en el procedimiento penal, y favorablemente la ley hizo y ha sido bastante imaginativa, estableciendo ahora derechos muy despejados para los que se fundamenta la legítima defensa privilegiada y concede una discrecionalidad bastante amplía al Juez.
Con lo anterior, se concluye, que la legítima defensa privilegiada introducida por la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana es superflua desde el punto de vista jurídico-dogmático dentro de nuestro ordenamiento jurídico colombiano, teniendo de presente la existencia previa de la legitima defensa, en su sentido original. Los casos de legítima defensa y de presunción de esta, se manejan adecuadamente con la fórmula legal previa a la introducción de la Ley de Seguridad Ciudadana. La modificación presenta riesgos innecesarios, la extensión del concepto de habitación a los vehículos y propiedad comercial, ya ha sido reconocida previamente, sin que fuese necesario legislar sobre dicha materia.
This research, whose objective is to determine the superfluity and mistakes of the figure of the Legitimate Privileged Defense in the Colombian legal system, taking into account the previous existence of the legitimate defense in its original sense and also its construction as a legal figure, a comparative analysis of the figure of the original legitimate defense in its article 32 of Law 599 of 2000, compared to the privileged legitimate defense introduced by Law 2197 of 2022 Law of Citizen Security is made. In virtue of the main objective of the research, a descriptive design research was proposed, with a qualitative research approach, given in compiling all the informative data from scientific articles, essays and academic research and the criminal legal system of the Colombian State, in order to develop the answer to the main research question. For this reason, the importance of the comparative recognition of the requirements that are intrinsic in the Legitimate Defense and the Legitimate Privileged Defense of the Colombian legal system, trying to raise a comparative analysis between these two modalities; in the understanding that some formal requirements must be met for there to be an absence of liability, because if these assumptions are not given, the same is not configured and therefore, the person will have to pay criminally that infraction. Consequently, the approach of this project intends not only to examine the normative requirements, but also to clarify the contrast between the two defenses raised and to question why the legislator issued this regulation, with what purpose and its normative force; since, showing the difficulties in the implementation of this new figure are supported by in the idea of providing the citizen with security and protection. In other words, the legislator's intention is based on the values of protection and defense, however, its possible application is problematic. From this perspective, this paper, in addition to raising the dogmatic and doctrinal distinctions of these two types of self-defense, seeks to critically question the functionality of privileged self-defense. As a result of the research, we have a simple comparison, where it can be assumed that self-defense is when a fact is objective; that is, when someone commits a crime and the other person acts in self-defense, after being assaulted. And the privileged self-defense, is given under an assumption of aggression, that is, a subjective impulse before the facts of the defender's conduct has been made by rejecting the escalation. The most important of the modifications introduced to the Law, already in force for many years in various governments, where the privilege refers to a legal procedural option, because none of this would have any practical effect if it did not translate into positive effects for the one who alleges the defense in the procedure, And as this would have an effect if it did not originate clear and understood transformations in the criminal procedure, and favorably the law did and has been quite imaginative, establishing now very clear rights for which the privileged self-defense is based and grants a quite wide discretion to the Judge. With the foregoing, it is concluded that the privileged self-defense introduced by the Law of Citizen Security is superfluous from the legal-dogmatic point of view within our Colombian legal system, bearing in mind the previous existence of self-defense, in its original sense. The cases of self-defense and presumption of self-defense are adequately handled with the legal formula prior to the introduction of the Citizen Security Law. The modification presents unnecessary risks, the extension of the concept of habitation to vehicles and commercial property has already been previously recognized, without it being necessary to legislate on such matter
This research, whose objective is to determine the superfluity and mistakes of the figure of the Legitimate Privileged Defense in the Colombian legal system, taking into account the previous existence of the legitimate defense in its original sense and also its construction as a legal figure, a comparative analysis of the figure of the original legitimate defense in its article 32 of Law 599 of 2000, compared to the privileged legitimate defense introduced by Law 2197 of 2022 Law of Citizen Security is made. In virtue of the main objective of the research, a descriptive design research was proposed, with a qualitative research approach, given in compiling all the informative data from scientific articles, essays and academic research and the criminal legal system of the Colombian State, in order to develop the answer to the main research question. For this reason, the importance of the comparative recognition of the requirements that are intrinsic in the Legitimate Defense and the Legitimate Privileged Defense of the Colombian legal system, trying to raise a comparative analysis between these two modalities; in the understanding that some formal requirements must be met for there to be an absence of liability, because if these assumptions are not given, the same is not configured and therefore, the person will have to pay criminally that infraction. Consequently, the approach of this project intends not only to examine the normative requirements, but also to clarify the contrast between the two defenses raised and to question why the legislator issued this regulation, with what purpose and its normative force; since, showing the difficulties in the implementation of this new figure are supported by in the idea of providing the citizen with security and protection. In other words, the legislator's intention is based on the values of protection and defense, however, its possible application is problematic. From this perspective, this paper, in addition to raising the dogmatic and doctrinal distinctions of these two types of self-defense, seeks to critically question the functionality of privileged self-defense. As a result of the research, we have a simple comparison, where it can be assumed that self-defense is when a fact is objective; that is, when someone commits a crime and the other person acts in self-defense, after being assaulted. And the privileged self-defense, is given under an assumption of aggression, that is, a subjective impulse before the facts of the defender's conduct has been made by rejecting the escalation. The most important of the modifications introduced to the Law, already in force for many years in various governments, where the privilege refers to a legal procedural option, because none of this would have any practical effect if it did not translate into positive effects for the one who alleges the defense in the procedure, And as this would have an effect if it did not originate clear and understood transformations in the criminal procedure, and favorably the law did and has been quite imaginative, establishing now very clear rights for which the privileged self-defense is based and grants a quite wide discretion to the Judge. With the foregoing, it is concluded that the privileged self-defense introduced by the Law of Citizen Security is superfluous from the legal-dogmatic point of view within our Colombian legal system, bearing in mind the previous existence of self-defense, in its original sense. The cases of self-defense and presumption of self-defense are adequately handled with the legal formula prior to the introduction of the Citizen Security Law. The modification presents unnecessary risks, the extension of the concept of habitation to vehicles and commercial property has already been previously recognized, without it being necessary to legislate on such matter
Descripción
Palabras clave
Ley 2197 de 2022, Legítima defensa, Legítima defensa privilegiada, Ley de seguridad ciudadana, Ausencia de responsabilidad, Law 2197 of 2022, Self-defense, Privileged self-defense, Citizen security law, Lack of liability, Absence of liability
