Aplicabilidad del principio de imparcialidad en el proceso contravencional de tránsito
Cargando...
Fecha
2025
Autores
Silvera Silvera, Elis María
De la Hoz Quintero, Edwin Elías
Galindo Castañeda, Narly Judith
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
La potestad sancionadora del Estado colombiano, como manifestación del ius
puniendi estatal en el ámbito administrativo, se erige como un instrumento esencial
para asegurar el cumplimiento del ordenamiento jurídico y la protección del interés
general. Sin embargo, su ejercicio no es absoluto y se encuentra íntimamente ligado
al cumplimiento de principios fundamentales del debido proceso, entre los cuales
resalta el principio de imparcialidad. Este principio, consagrado en la Constitución
Política y desarrollado por la jurisprudencia y la doctrina, exige que la actuación de
la administración en el ejercicio de su facultad sancionadora esté despojada de
cualquier sesgo, prejuicio o interés que pueda comprometer la objetividad de la
decisión.
El presente ensayo tiene como finalidad, analizar la aplicabilidad del principio de
imparcialidad en el procedimiento sancionatorio contravencional de tránsito, dado
que, se hace indispensable que las autoridades administrativas de tránsito en el
ejercicio del poder punitivo del Estado y en el desarrollo de sus actuaciones
administrativas, propendan a salvaguardar los principios constitucionales y las
garantías del debido proceso, con observancia de éste principio; por ende, resulta
imperioso que el funcionario competente para dirimir los asuntos contravencionales,
sea un tercero neutral e imparcial que garantice decisiones libres de
parcializaciones o motivaciones subjetivas, pues como autoridad que investiga y
decide de fondo la sanción a imponer al ciudadano ante la comisión de conductas
contrarias al Código Nacional de Tránsito, podría traspasarse esa delgada línea e
incurrir en ser juez y parte a la vez; lo que eventualmente podría cercenar los
derechos de los administrados, al proferir por parte del operador decisiones con
sesgos. Más aún, si se parte del presupuesto de que el procedimiento
contravencional de tránsito se erige como un proceso importante, al cual acuden
con frecuencia los administrados cuando presuntamente comenten una infracción a
las normas de tránsito para ejercer su derecho a la defensa y contradicción en
audiencia pública de conformidad con el Art. 136 en la Ley 769 de 2002.
Es por ello que, dada la importancia que reviste el principio de imparcialidad, es que
el proceso administrativo contravencional debe garantizar su materialización y su
estricta aplicabilidad en todas las actuaciones administrativas, la cual es imperativa
y no discrecional de la autoridad de tránsito; lo que garantizaría la legitimidad de sus
decisiones basada en las reglas de la sana critica, ajustadas a derecho y con apego
a la normativa especial.
The Colombian State's sanctioning power, as a manifestation of the State's ius puniendi in the administrative sphere, stands as an essential instrument for ensuring compliance with the legal system and the protection of the general interest. However, its exercise is not absolute and is closely linked to compliance with fundamental principles of due process, among which the principle of impartiality stands out. This principle, enshrined in the Political Constitution and developed by jurisprudence and doctrine, requires that the administration's actions in the exercise of its sanctioning power be free of any bias, prejudice, or interest that could compromise the objectivity of the decision. The purpose of this essay is to analyze the applicability of the principle of impartiality in the sanctioning procedure for traffic violations, given that it is essential that the administrative traffic authorities, in the exercise of the State's punitive power and in the development of their administrative actions, strive to safeguard constitutional principles and due process guarantees, with observance of this principle. Therefore, it is imperative that the official competent to resolve contravention matters be a neutral and impartial third party who guarantees decisions free of bias or subjective motivations, since, as the authority that investigates and decides the sanction to be imposed on the citizen for committing conduct contrary to the National Traffic Code, this fine line could be crossed and incur being both judge and party; which could eventually curtail the rights of the administered, when the operator issues biased decisions. Furthermore, if we start from the assumption that the traffic violation procedure is an important process, which is frequently used by citizens when they allegedly commit a traffic violation to exercise their right to defense and contradiction in a public hearing in accordance with Article 136 of Law 769 of 2002. Therefore, given the importance of the principle of impartiality, the administrative process for violations must guarantee its implementation and strict applicability in all administrative actions. This is mandatory and not discretionary for the transit authority. This would guarantee the legitimacy of its decisions based on the rules of sound judgment, in accordance with the law and in compliance with special regulations.
The Colombian State's sanctioning power, as a manifestation of the State's ius puniendi in the administrative sphere, stands as an essential instrument for ensuring compliance with the legal system and the protection of the general interest. However, its exercise is not absolute and is closely linked to compliance with fundamental principles of due process, among which the principle of impartiality stands out. This principle, enshrined in the Political Constitution and developed by jurisprudence and doctrine, requires that the administration's actions in the exercise of its sanctioning power be free of any bias, prejudice, or interest that could compromise the objectivity of the decision. The purpose of this essay is to analyze the applicability of the principle of impartiality in the sanctioning procedure for traffic violations, given that it is essential that the administrative traffic authorities, in the exercise of the State's punitive power and in the development of their administrative actions, strive to safeguard constitutional principles and due process guarantees, with observance of this principle. Therefore, it is imperative that the official competent to resolve contravention matters be a neutral and impartial third party who guarantees decisions free of bias or subjective motivations, since, as the authority that investigates and decides the sanction to be imposed on the citizen for committing conduct contrary to the National Traffic Code, this fine line could be crossed and incur being both judge and party; which could eventually curtail the rights of the administered, when the operator issues biased decisions. Furthermore, if we start from the assumption that the traffic violation procedure is an important process, which is frequently used by citizens when they allegedly commit a traffic violation to exercise their right to defense and contradiction in a public hearing in accordance with Article 136 of Law 769 of 2002. Therefore, given the importance of the principle of impartiality, the administrative process for violations must guarantee its implementation and strict applicability in all administrative actions. This is mandatory and not discretionary for the transit authority. This would guarantee the legitimacy of its decisions based on the rules of sound judgment, in accordance with the law and in compliance with special regulations.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Principio de imparcialidad, Proceso Contravencional de tránsito, Potestad sancionadora del Estado, Principios Constitucionales, Código Nacional de Tránsito, Autoridad administrativa de tránsito
