El populismo punitivo: un análisis a su capitalización como herramienta electoral
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2026
Autores
Lázaro Parada, Mayerson Uriel
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
Este ensayo analiza el populismo punitivo como una herramienta legislativa que amenaza la estabilidad y legitimidad del Estado Social y Democrático de Derecho en Colombia. Se argumenta que esta tendencia no es solo una preferencia por el rigor penal, sino una estrategia política que instrumentaliza el miedo y la desconfianza institucional
para acumular capital electoral, contraviniendo los principios de dignidad humana y limitación del poder punitivo de la Constitución de 1991.
El estudio evidencia que este fenómeno opera mediante la sustitución de la lógica garantista y resocializadora (Ferrajoli, Roxin) por una de exclusión simbólica (Garland,
Wacquant), priorizando la emoción (Bauman) sobre la razón técnica. Esta deriva se concretó en normas como el Acto Legislativo 01 de 2020, la Ley 1453 de 2011 y la Ley
1709 de 2014, las cuales vulneraron la proporcionalidad y la finalidad de la pena.
La consecuencia más grave es la erosión del Rule of Law y la consolidación de un "Estado Penal" que deslegitima la función contramayunitaria de la Corte Constitucional (Nino, Muñoz Conde). Su impacto material es el colapso carcelario declarado como Estado de Cosas Inconstitucional (ECI), donde la victoria simbólica del legislador se traduce en violaciones sistemáticas a los derechos humanos. El ensayo concluye que defender el modelo constitucional exige reafirmar la última ratio, implementar filtros de racionalidad legislativa y adoptar políticas criminales integrales que aborden las causas estructurales de la criminalidad.
This essay analyzes punitive populism as a legislative tool that threatens the stability and legitimacy of the Social and Democratic Rule of Law in Colombia. It argues that this trend is not merely a preference for penal rigor, but a political strategy that instrumentalizes fear and institutional distrust to accumulate electoral capital, contravening the principles of human dignity and the limitation of punitive power enshrined in the 1991 Constitution. The study demonstrates that this phenomenon operates by replacing a guarantor and resocializing logic (Ferrajoli, Roxin) with one of symbolic exclusion (Garland, Wacquant), prioritizing emotion (Bauman) over technical reason. This shift materialized in regulations such as Legislative Act 01 of 2020, Law 1453 of 2011, and Law 1709 of 2014, which violated the principles of proportionality and the fundamental purpose of punishment. The most severe consequence is the erosion of the Rule of Law and the consolidation of a "Penal State" that delegitimizes the counter-majoritarian function of the Constitutional Court (Nino, Muñoz Conde). Its material impact is the prison collapse declared as a State of Unconstitutional Affairs (ECI), where the legislator's symbolic victory translates into systematic human rights violations. The essay concludes that defending the constitutional model requires reaffirming the ultima ratio principle, implementing legislative rationality filters, and adopting comprehensive criminal policies that address the structural causes of crime.
This essay analyzes punitive populism as a legislative tool that threatens the stability and legitimacy of the Social and Democratic Rule of Law in Colombia. It argues that this trend is not merely a preference for penal rigor, but a political strategy that instrumentalizes fear and institutional distrust to accumulate electoral capital, contravening the principles of human dignity and the limitation of punitive power enshrined in the 1991 Constitution. The study demonstrates that this phenomenon operates by replacing a guarantor and resocializing logic (Ferrajoli, Roxin) with one of symbolic exclusion (Garland, Wacquant), prioritizing emotion (Bauman) over technical reason. This shift materialized in regulations such as Legislative Act 01 of 2020, Law 1453 of 2011, and Law 1709 of 2014, which violated the principles of proportionality and the fundamental purpose of punishment. The most severe consequence is the erosion of the Rule of Law and the consolidation of a "Penal State" that delegitimizes the counter-majoritarian function of the Constitutional Court (Nino, Muñoz Conde). Its material impact is the prison collapse declared as a State of Unconstitutional Affairs (ECI), where the legislator's symbolic victory translates into systematic human rights violations. The essay concludes that defending the constitutional model requires reaffirming the ultima ratio principle, implementing legislative rationality filters, and adopting comprehensive criminal policies that address the structural causes of crime.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Populismo punitivo, Garantismo, Dignidad humana, Última ratio, Proporcionalidad
