Pena de prisión de perpetua en Colombia ¿Posibilidad jurídica o simple populismo punitivo?
Fecha
2023
Autores
Flórez Tovar, Mohamed
Fruto Pizarro, Sergio Luis
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
El interés por esta temática nace a partir del reiterado planteamiento de proyectos legislativos de esta naturaleza, y de observar en sus más acérrimos defensores una predilección a discutirlo en medios masivos de comunicación, esa situación, contrastada a la luz de los conocimientos básicos que posee cualquier estudiante de Derecho, generan de inmediato una disonancia, pues lo primero que surge en la conciencia cuando se inicia este debate son las barreras constitucionales que se presentarán al encuentro de este tipo de medidas, como pueden ser: el
desconocimiento de la dignidad humana, la situación de hacinamiento que se vive en los establecimientos carcelarios, la nula resocialización y la popularmente llamada “especialización delictiva” que reciben los miembros de la población carcelaria, entre otros. Pues la respuesta más sencilla es que no, además de que la información que proporciona estos conocimientos está completamente disponible para su consulta, por lo que su dominio debería ser más que natural para aquellos a quienes se les otorga el poder para legislar, por lo que cabe analizar, cuál sería la necesidad de presentar proyectos de ley, encaminados a implantar la pena de prisión perpetua en Colombia, si los congresistas, que presentan dichos proyectos, conocen de antemano el contenido del artículo 34 de la Constitución, el cual indica claramente que, “se prohíben las penas de destierro, prisión perpetua y confiscación”, situación que motivó a investigar la procedibilidad y necesidad de la prisión perpetua como política criminal del Estado o si por el contrario, se trata de un mero capricho punitivo.
En esta oportunidad se abordará la temática de la prisión perpetua. Por medio de este ensayo científico se analizará la viabilidad de la medida, y si es posible que algún día el ordenamiento jurídico colombiano la ampare, o solo se quedará como una propuesta populista, persiguiendo fines políticos. Por lo que analizamos la procedibilidad, proporcionalidad y necesidad de la prisión perpetua, como política criminal del Estado colombiano, o si, por el contrario, se trata de un mero capricho punitivo.
La tesis central que se plantea, es que, desde ciertos sectores de la sociedad colombiana, se observa al aparato judicial punitivo, como un mecanismo de revancha social, lo que despierta en muchas personas un sentimiento de desprecio hacia el criminal, a tal punto que se considera merecedor(a), de la pena más grave imponible, y cuando este sesgo no se cumple, se reprocha al aparato judicial, jueces y fiscales sobre todo, situación aprovechada por congresistas, quienes aprovechando tal investidura, han logrado promover proyectos encaminados a promover la prisión perpetua, estando prohibida, por lo que, se puede inferir un tinte más político, que, de política criminal.
La tesis expuesta, buscará responder la siguiente interrogante ¿Por qué la normatividad constitucional e internacional, imposibilita la pena de prisión perpetua en Colombia? En ese sentido, se requiere identificar y explicar las barreras jurídicas que afectan su introducción al Corpus Iuris del sistema penal oral acusatorio.
Este ensayo científico, se revisaron todos los aspectos jurídicos, ontológicos y sociales cuyo análisis cobra importancia a la hora de sancionar a una persona con la imposición de una pena privativa de la libertad, esto con el fin de observar si la pena de prisión perpetua es afín a estos presupuestos que guían la sentencia condenatoria.
The interest in this subject arises from the repeated approach of legislative projects of this nature, and from observing in its staunchest defenders a predilection for discussing it in the mass media, this situation, contrasted in light of the basic knowledge possessed by any law student, immediately generate a dissonance, since the first thing that arises in the conscience when this debate begins are the constitutional barriers that will be presented to the encounter of this type of measures, such as: the ignorance of human dignity, the overcrowded situation in prisons, the null resocialization and the popularly called “criminal specialization” that members of the prison population receive, among others. Well, the simplest answer is no, in addition to the fact that the information provided by this knowledge is completely available for consultation, so its domain should be more than natural for those who are granted the power to legislate, so It is worth analyzing, what would be the need to present bills, aimed at implementing the life imprisonment sentence in Colombia, if the congressmen, who present said bills, know in advance the content of article 34 of the Constitution, which clearly indicates that , "sentences of banishment, life imprisonment and confiscation are prohibited", a situation that motivated to investigate the procedural and necessity of life imprisonment as a criminal policy of the State or if, on the contrary, it is a mere punitive whim. The central thesis that is put forward is that, from certain sectors of Colombian society, the punitive judicial apparatus is observed as a mechanism of social revenge, which arouses in many people a feeling of contempt towards the criminal, to such an extent that is considered deserving of the most serious penalty that can be imposed, and when this bias is not met, the judicial apparatus, judges and prosecutors above all, are blamed, a situation taken advantage of by congressmen, who, taking advantage of such investiture, have managed to promote projects aimed at promote life imprisonment, being prohibited, therefore, a more political tinge can be inferred, than criminal policy. The exposed thesis will seek to answer the following question: Why do constitutional and international regulations make life imprisonment impossible in Colombia? In this sense, it is necessary to identify and explain the legal barriers that affect its introduction to the Corpus Iuris of the accusatory oral criminal system. In this scientific essay, all legal, ontological and social aspects were reviewed whose analysis becomes important when punishing a person with the imposition of a custodial sentence, this in order to see if the life sentence is related to these assumptions that guide the conviction.
The interest in this subject arises from the repeated approach of legislative projects of this nature, and from observing in its staunchest defenders a predilection for discussing it in the mass media, this situation, contrasted in light of the basic knowledge possessed by any law student, immediately generate a dissonance, since the first thing that arises in the conscience when this debate begins are the constitutional barriers that will be presented to the encounter of this type of measures, such as: the ignorance of human dignity, the overcrowded situation in prisons, the null resocialization and the popularly called “criminal specialization” that members of the prison population receive, among others. Well, the simplest answer is no, in addition to the fact that the information provided by this knowledge is completely available for consultation, so its domain should be more than natural for those who are granted the power to legislate, so It is worth analyzing, what would be the need to present bills, aimed at implementing the life imprisonment sentence in Colombia, if the congressmen, who present said bills, know in advance the content of article 34 of the Constitution, which clearly indicates that , "sentences of banishment, life imprisonment and confiscation are prohibited", a situation that motivated to investigate the procedural and necessity of life imprisonment as a criminal policy of the State or if, on the contrary, it is a mere punitive whim. The central thesis that is put forward is that, from certain sectors of Colombian society, the punitive judicial apparatus is observed as a mechanism of social revenge, which arouses in many people a feeling of contempt towards the criminal, to such an extent that is considered deserving of the most serious penalty that can be imposed, and when this bias is not met, the judicial apparatus, judges and prosecutors above all, are blamed, a situation taken advantage of by congressmen, who, taking advantage of such investiture, have managed to promote projects aimed at promote life imprisonment, being prohibited, therefore, a more political tinge can be inferred, than criminal policy. The exposed thesis will seek to answer the following question: Why do constitutional and international regulations make life imprisonment impossible in Colombia? In this sense, it is necessary to identify and explain the legal barriers that affect its introduction to the Corpus Iuris of the accusatory oral criminal system. In this scientific essay, all legal, ontological and social aspects were reviewed whose analysis becomes important when punishing a person with the imposition of a custodial sentence, this in order to see if the life sentence is related to these assumptions that guide the conviction.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Estado, Fines de la pena, Política criminal, Populismo punitivo, Necesidad, Proporcionalidad, State, Purposes of punishment, Criminal policy, Punitive populism, Necessity, Proportionality
