Eficacia de la conciliación en materia de reparación directa por privación injusta de la libertad a la luz de la jurisprudencia del consejo de estado 2018- 2022
Cargando...
Fecha
2022
Autores
Castro Ipuana, Osman Yair
Villa Márquez, Alberto Mario
Ortega Paternina, Rafael Esteban
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
En el ensayo se realiza un análisis de la eficacia de la conciliación en materia de reparación directa por privación injusta de la libertad a la luz de la jurisprudencia del consejo de Estado 2018- 2022, que ha estudiado el derecho a la libertad consagrado en el artículo 28 de la Constitución Política de Colombia, que señala que nadie puede ser molestado en su persona o familia, ni reducido a prisión o arresto, ni detenido, ni su domicilio registrado, sino en virtud de mandamiento escrito de autoridad judicial competente; es decir, constitucionalmente para imponer las penas de prisión, arresto y detención deberá estar sujeto por principios de legalidad y debido proceso, que vienen siendo garantías otorgada a todos los ciudadanos.
El artículo 68 de la ley 270 de 1996 señala que quién haya sido privado injustamente de la libertad podrá demandar al Estado la reparación de perjuicios, lo cual encuentra respaldo en el artículo 90 de la Carta Superior de 1991, que dispone que el Estado responderá patrimonialmente por los daños antijurídicos que le sean imputables, causados por la acción o la omisión de las autoridades públicas; pero los artículos 137, 138, 140 y 141 del Código de Procedimiento y de lo Contencioso Administrativo, que consagran los distintos medios de control han establecido como requisito de procedibilidad en materia contenciosa administrativa el previo agotamiento extrajudicial de la solicitud de conciliación siendo este un mecanismo alternativo de solución de conflicto que coadyuva a la descongestión de la administración de justicia, el ahorro patrimonial
para beneficio de las entidades públicas y los órganos estatales como también la protección y garantías de los derechos de los ciudadanos.
In the essay, an analysis is made of the effectiveness of conciliation in terms of direct reparation for unjust deprivation of liberty in light of the jurisprudence of the Council of State 2018-2022, which has studied the right to liberty enshrined in the article 28 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, which states that no one may be harassed in his person or family, or reduced to prison or arrest, or detained, or his address registered, except by virtue of a written order from a competent judicial authority; that is, constitutionally to impose prison sentences, arrest and detention must be subject to principles of legality and due process, which are guarantees granted to all citizens. Article 68 of Law 270 of 1996 states that whoever has been unjustly deprived of liberty may sue the State for compensation for damages, which is supported by Article 90 of the Superior Charter of 1991, which provides that the State will respond patrimonially for unlawful damages attributable to it, caused by the action or omission of public authorities; but articles 137, 138, 140 and 141 of the Code of Procedure and Administrative Litigation, which enshrine the different means of control, have established as a procedural requirement in contentious-administrative matters the prior out-of-court exhaustion of the conciliation request, this being a mechanism alternative conflict resolution that contributes to decongesting the administration of justice, saving assets for the benefit of public entities and state bodies as well as the protection and guarantees of the rights of citizens.
In the essay, an analysis is made of the effectiveness of conciliation in terms of direct reparation for unjust deprivation of liberty in light of the jurisprudence of the Council of State 2018-2022, which has studied the right to liberty enshrined in the article 28 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, which states that no one may be harassed in his person or family, or reduced to prison or arrest, or detained, or his address registered, except by virtue of a written order from a competent judicial authority; that is, constitutionally to impose prison sentences, arrest and detention must be subject to principles of legality and due process, which are guarantees granted to all citizens. Article 68 of Law 270 of 1996 states that whoever has been unjustly deprived of liberty may sue the State for compensation for damages, which is supported by Article 90 of the Superior Charter of 1991, which provides that the State will respond patrimonially for unlawful damages attributable to it, caused by the action or omission of public authorities; but articles 137, 138, 140 and 141 of the Code of Procedure and Administrative Litigation, which enshrine the different means of control, have established as a procedural requirement in contentious-administrative matters the prior out-of-court exhaustion of the conciliation request, this being a mechanism alternative conflict resolution that contributes to decongesting the administration of justice, saving assets for the benefit of public entities and state bodies as well as the protection and guarantees of the rights of citizens.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Eficacia, Conciliación, Reparación directa, Privación de la libertad, Jurisprudencia, Effectiveness, Conciliation, Direct reparation, Deprivation of Liberty, Jurisprudence
