Criterios de la dosificación de la sanción disciplinaria: una mirada desde la ley 1952 de 2019
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2026
Autores
Leal Vivas, Israel
Tarazona Osorio, Juan Camilo
Antolínez Peña, Franky Rene
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 presente investigación analiza los criterios de dosificación de la sanción disciplinaria en el marco de la Ley 1952 de 2019, a la luz de los principios de proporcionalidad y razonabilidad y del desarrollo jurisprudencial colombiano reciente. El problema de investigación consistió en determinar si la normativa vigente establece criterios suficientemente claros y objetivos para evitar márgenes excesivos de discrecionalidad en la graduación de la sanción, garantizando decisiones coherentes con el Estado Social de Derecho.
El estudio adoptó un enfoque cualitativo documental, basado en el paradigma hermenéutico-interpretativo, mediante el análisis sistemático de normas constitucionales y legales,
doctrina especializada y jurisprudencia de la Corte Constitucional y del Consejo de Estado. Se emplearon técnicas de revisión documental, análisis jurisprudencial y categorización temática.
Los resultados muestran que la Ley 1952 de 2019 incorpora criterios formales para la graduación de la sanción; sin embargo, están formulados en términos amplios que exigen una interpretación rigurosa por parte del operador disciplinario. La jurisprudencia ha fortalecido el control de proporcionalidad, exigiendo motivación suficiente y coherente en la individualización de la sanción, aunque persisten diferencias en la intensidad argumentativa de algunas decisiones.
Se concluye que los criterios normativos y jurisprudenciales son estructuralmente suficientes para garantizar decisiones objetivas y coherentes, siempre que se apliquen mediante
una metodología sistemática que incorpore expresamente el test de proporcionalidad. Se proponen lineamientos para fortalecer la claridad, uniformidad y control de la discrecionalidad en la dosificación disciplinaria
This research analyzes the criteria for determining disciplinary sanctions under Law 1952 of 2019, in light of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness and recent Colombian jurisprudence. The study sought to determine whether the current regulation establishes sufficiently clear and objective standards to prevent excessive discretion in sanction grading and ensure decisions consistent with the Social Rule of Law. A qualitative documentary approach was adopted, based on a hermeneutic-interpretative paradigm, through the systematic analysis of constitutional and legal provisions, specialized doctrine, and jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and the Council of State. Documentary review, case law analysis, and thematic categorization were used. The findings show that Law 1952 of 2019 establishes formal criteria for sanction grading; however, they are broadly formulated and require rigorous interpretation by disciplinary authorities. Recent case law has strengthened proportionality control, demanding sufficient and coherent reasoning in the individualization of sanctions, although differences remain in argumentative intensity. It is concluded that the normative and jurisprudential criteria are structurally sufficient to ensure objective and coherent decisions, provided they are applied through a systematic interpretative methodology that expressly incorporates the proportionality test. Guidelines are proposed to enhance clarity, uniformity, and control of discretion in disciplinary sanctioning.
This research analyzes the criteria for determining disciplinary sanctions under Law 1952 of 2019, in light of the principles of proportionality and reasonableness and recent Colombian jurisprudence. The study sought to determine whether the current regulation establishes sufficiently clear and objective standards to prevent excessive discretion in sanction grading and ensure decisions consistent with the Social Rule of Law. A qualitative documentary approach was adopted, based on a hermeneutic-interpretative paradigm, through the systematic analysis of constitutional and legal provisions, specialized doctrine, and jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and the Council of State. Documentary review, case law analysis, and thematic categorization were used. The findings show that Law 1952 of 2019 establishes formal criteria for sanction grading; however, they are broadly formulated and require rigorous interpretation by disciplinary authorities. Recent case law has strengthened proportionality control, demanding sufficient and coherent reasoning in the individualization of sanctions, although differences remain in argumentative intensity. It is concluded that the normative and jurisprudential criteria are structurally sufficient to ensure objective and coherent decisions, provided they are applied through a systematic interpretative methodology that expressly incorporates the proportionality test. Guidelines are proposed to enhance clarity, uniformity, and control of discretion in disciplinary sanctioning.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Derecho disciplinario, Dosificación sancionatoria, Proporcionalidad, Razonabilidad, Discrecionalidad administrativa
