Los miembros de fuerza pública y la posición de garante en delitos de comisión por omisión masacre de Mapiripán: sentencia su.1184/01 corte constitucional
Cargando...
Fecha
2023
Autores
Bohórquez Manco, María Alejandra
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 presente trabajo de investigación pretende ambiciosamente, mostrar la problemática emanada de la obligación legal de los miembros de la fuerza pública en Colombia, conforme se establece la posición de garante en el entendido de la obligación de salvaguardar, amparar, proteger y asegurar los derechos fundamentales de los habitantes del territorio nacional, identificando los elementos estructuradores de la Posición de Garante, de acuerdo a lo preceptuado en el artículo 25 del CP, en concordancia con: artículos 1, 2, 6, 216, 217 Y 218 de la constitución política de Colombia, y los artículos 7 y 28 del Estatuto de Roma.
En este trabajo se estableció el marco normativo, dogmático y jurisprudencial de la posición de garante en los miembros de fuerza pública, como aseguradores, custodios y protectores de los derechos y garantías fundamentales de los residentes en Colombia, para reprochar entonces la responsabilidad de NO actuar estando obligado a ello; dicho de otra manera, el trabajo de investigación pretendió delimitar la configuración de los delitos de lesa humanidad en comisión por omisión cuando el sujeto activo es un miembro de fuerza pública, derivado esto de la posición de garante que le ha sido encargada respecto de la salvaguarda y protección de los derechos fundamentales de los coasociados.
Lo anterior, en el entendido de que la responsabilidad de los miembros de fuerza pública proviene de la designación y delegación por vía constitucional de las funciones de protección de garantías y derechos fundamentales de los coasociados en cabeza del estado social de derecho.
En la sentencia SU 1184/2001, proferida por la Corte Constitucional, con ponencia del Magistrado EDUARDO MONTEALGRE LYNETT, se analizaron los hechos ocurridos los días 15 a 20 de julio de 1997, en el Municipio de Mapiripán (Meta), cuando en incursión armada personas vestidas con prendas militares, sometieron a
la población civil de Mapiripán, dejando como resultado la retención, tortura y asesinato de un total de cuarenta y nueve (49) personas, sin que mediara accionar alguno por parte de las Unidades Militares adyacentes con competencia jurisdiccional sobre dicho municipio.
A partir de dicho caso, se desarrolló entonces la posición de garante de los miembros de fuerza pública, de cara a la creación de riesgos para bienes jurídicos tutelados y el surgimiento de deberes por la vinculación a una institución estatal, pues en los delitos de comisión por omisión en los que se tenga como sujeto activo al miembro de fuerza pública, en estricto sentido debe tener relación directa con el servicio, puesto que la obligación legal de actuar de estos, proviene de la obligación legal de salvaguardar, proteger y asegurar los derechos fundamentales de los coasociados.
Ello en virtud a los desafíos que enfrentó la Corte Constitucional, para definir la responsabilidad de los militares, específicamente del General Uscátegui, quien tenía el deber jurídico de actuar en garantía y protección de los derechos fundamentales a la vida e integridad personal de la población del municipio Mapiripán, en su condición de miembro activo de la fuerza pública, con mando, y control sobre las tropas adyacentes, y de quien se predica competencia jurisdiccional y funcional sobre el casco urbano del municipio antes enunciado.
Proyecta el presente estudio establecer el marco normativo que regula la obligación de los miembros de fuerza pública frente a la salvaguarda de la vida, honra y bienes de los residentes en Colombia, además de analizar la línea jurisprudencial y doctrinaria que en la materia se ha expuesto y las normas que en derecho regulan la materia, como quiera que, la responsabilidad penal no puede predicarse respecto del miembro de fuerza pública, por su sola condición, pues la exigencia al deber de actuar se haya limitada por la expresión “estando en capacidad de hacerlo”, y es aquí donde se ubica la mayor complejidad desde el punto de vista funcional y jurisdiccional.
En este sentido, se hace necesario establecer la responsabilidad del Estado colombiano, delegada a los miembros de fuerza pública, frente a la salvaguarda y custodia de derechos y garantías de los coasociados, toda vez que la posición de garante para los miembros de fuerza pública es institucional; adviértase que, ya la mera configuración de los delitos de comisión por omisión constituye todo un desafío dogmático-normativo, y ahora le sumamos el componente de obligación de salvaguarda y tutela de derechos y garantías constitucionales por los miembros de fuerza pública estando en la obligación de hacerlo.
This research work ambitiously intends to show the problems arising from the legal obligation of members of the security forces in Colombia, in accordance with the guarantor position in the understanding of the obligation to safeguard, protect, protect and ensure the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of the national territory, identifying the structuring elements of the Guarantor Position, in accordance with the provisions of Article 25 of the CP, in accordance with: Articles 1, 2, 6, 216, 217 and 218 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, and Articles 7 and 28 of the Rome Statute. This work established the normative, dogmatic and jurisprudential framework of the position of guarantor in the members of the public force, as insurers, custodians and protectors of the fundamental rights and guarantees of the residents in Colombia, in order to reproach then the responsibility of NOT acting being obliged to do so; In other words, the research work sought to delimit the configuration of crimes against humanity in commission by omission when the active subject is a member of the public force, derived from the position of guarantor that has been entrusted with respect to the safeguarding and protection of the fundamental rights of co-associates. The foregoing, in the understanding that the responsibility of the members of the public force stems from the designation and delegation by constitutional means of the functions of protection of guarantees and fundamental rights of the co-associates in the head of the social state of law. Ruling SU 1184/2001, handed down by the Constitutional Court, with Magistrate EDUARDO MONTEALGRE LYNETT presiding, analyzed the events of July 15 to 20, 1997, in the Municipality of Mapiripán (Meta), when in an armed incursion persons dressed in military garments subdued the civilian population of Mapiripán, resulting in the retention, torture and murder of a total of forty-nine (49) persons, without any action on the part of the Military Units of Mapiripán, subdued the civilian population of Mapiripán, resulting in the retention, torture and murder of a total of forty-nine (49) persons, without any action on the part of the adjacent military units with jurisdiction over the municipality. From this case, the position of guarantor of the members of the public force was then developed, in view of the creation of risks for protected legal assets and the emergence of duties due to the link to a state institution, since in the crimes of commission by omission in which the active subject is the member of the public force, strictly speaking must have a direct relationship with the service, since the legal obligation to act of these, comes from the legal obligation to safeguard, protect and ensure the fundamental rights of the co-partners. This by virtue of the challenges faced by the Constitutional Court, to define the responsibility of the military, specifically of General Uscátegui, who had the legal duty to act to guarantee and protect the fundamental rights to life and personal integrity of the population of the municipality of Mapiripán, as an active member of the public force, with command and control over the adjacent troops, and who has jurisdictional and functional competence over the urban center of the aforementioned municipality. The present study intends to establish the normative framework that regulates the obligation of members of the public force to safeguard the life, honor and property of residents in Colombia, in addition to analyzing the jurisprudential and doctrinal line that has been set forth on the matter and the rules that regulate the matter in law, since criminal liability cannot be predicated with respect to the member of the public force, due to his condition alone, since the requirement of the duty to act is limited by the expression "being in capacity to do so", and it is here where the greatest complexity is located from the functional and jurisdictional point of view. In this sense, it is necessary to establish the responsibility of the Colombian State, delegated to the members of the public force, with respect to the safeguard and custody of rights and guarantees of the co-partners, since the position of guarantor for the members of the public force is institutional; note that the mere configuration of the crimes of commission by omission constitutes a dogmatic-normative challenge, and now we add the component of the obligation to safeguard and protect constitutional rights and guarantees by the members of the public force being in the obligation to do so.
This research work ambitiously intends to show the problems arising from the legal obligation of members of the security forces in Colombia, in accordance with the guarantor position in the understanding of the obligation to safeguard, protect, protect and ensure the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of the national territory, identifying the structuring elements of the Guarantor Position, in accordance with the provisions of Article 25 of the CP, in accordance with: Articles 1, 2, 6, 216, 217 and 218 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, and Articles 7 and 28 of the Rome Statute. This work established the normative, dogmatic and jurisprudential framework of the position of guarantor in the members of the public force, as insurers, custodians and protectors of the fundamental rights and guarantees of the residents in Colombia, in order to reproach then the responsibility of NOT acting being obliged to do so; In other words, the research work sought to delimit the configuration of crimes against humanity in commission by omission when the active subject is a member of the public force, derived from the position of guarantor that has been entrusted with respect to the safeguarding and protection of the fundamental rights of co-associates. The foregoing, in the understanding that the responsibility of the members of the public force stems from the designation and delegation by constitutional means of the functions of protection of guarantees and fundamental rights of the co-associates in the head of the social state of law. Ruling SU 1184/2001, handed down by the Constitutional Court, with Magistrate EDUARDO MONTEALGRE LYNETT presiding, analyzed the events of July 15 to 20, 1997, in the Municipality of Mapiripán (Meta), when in an armed incursion persons dressed in military garments subdued the civilian population of Mapiripán, resulting in the retention, torture and murder of a total of forty-nine (49) persons, without any action on the part of the Military Units of Mapiripán, subdued the civilian population of Mapiripán, resulting in the retention, torture and murder of a total of forty-nine (49) persons, without any action on the part of the adjacent military units with jurisdiction over the municipality. From this case, the position of guarantor of the members of the public force was then developed, in view of the creation of risks for protected legal assets and the emergence of duties due to the link to a state institution, since in the crimes of commission by omission in which the active subject is the member of the public force, strictly speaking must have a direct relationship with the service, since the legal obligation to act of these, comes from the legal obligation to safeguard, protect and ensure the fundamental rights of the co-partners. This by virtue of the challenges faced by the Constitutional Court, to define the responsibility of the military, specifically of General Uscátegui, who had the legal duty to act to guarantee and protect the fundamental rights to life and personal integrity of the population of the municipality of Mapiripán, as an active member of the public force, with command and control over the adjacent troops, and who has jurisdictional and functional competence over the urban center of the aforementioned municipality. The present study intends to establish the normative framework that regulates the obligation of members of the public force to safeguard the life, honor and property of residents in Colombia, in addition to analyzing the jurisprudential and doctrinal line that has been set forth on the matter and the rules that regulate the matter in law, since criminal liability cannot be predicated with respect to the member of the public force, due to his condition alone, since the requirement of the duty to act is limited by the expression "being in capacity to do so", and it is here where the greatest complexity is located from the functional and jurisdictional point of view. In this sense, it is necessary to establish the responsibility of the Colombian State, delegated to the members of the public force, with respect to the safeguard and custody of rights and guarantees of the co-partners, since the position of guarantor for the members of the public force is institutional; note that the mere configuration of the crimes of commission by omission constitutes a dogmatic-normative challenge, and now we add the component of the obligation to safeguard and protect constitutional rights and guarantees by the members of the public force being in the obligation to do so.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Garante, Omisión, Fuerza, Pública, Mapiripán, Guarantor, Omission, Force, Public, Mapiripán, Public, Force
