El Principio de Supletoriedad como vulneración al bien jurídico protegido por el Derecho a la Competencia
Fecha
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Acceso al texto completo solo para la Comunidad PUCP
Resumen
El trabajo aborda la problemática que se genera debido a la aplicación del Principio de
Supletoriedad en los conflictos normativos entre el Derecho a la Competencia y el
Derecho Regulatorio, en el sistema jurídico peruano. Dicho principio establece la
primacía de las normas regulatorias sobre las normas de competencia en casos de
conflicto normativo. Si bien esta solución parece resolver los conflictos normativos, es
importante considerar que el bien jurídico protegido por el Derecho a la Competencia y
el Derecho Regulatorio son completamente diferentes.
En el caso del Derecho a la Competencia se centra en la protección del proceso
competitivo para fomentar un correcto desarrollo de los mercados. Por su parte, el
Derecho Regulatorio busca garantizar el acceso y la calidad de los servicios públicos en
sectores estratégicos como energía, telecomunicaciones, entre otros. Como se observa,
ambas ramas del Derecho tienen finalidades diferentes, por lo que la aplicación del
Principio de Supletoriedad subordina los objetivos del Derecho a la Competencia,
centrándose únicamente en el bien jurídico tutelado por el Derecho Regulatorio.
De esta forma, se genera una vulneración al bien jurídico tutelado por el Derecho a la
Competencia, lo cual a su vez genera consecuencias negativas producto de la falta de
vigilancia de la competencia, como es el caso de la aparición de monopolios regulados
o disminución en la calidad del servicio, incluso en los mercados regulados.
The paper addresses the issues arising from the application of the Principle of Subsidiarity in normative conflicts between Competition Law and Regulatory Law within the Peruvian legal system. This principle establishes the primacy of regulatory norms over competition norms in cases of normative conflict. While this solution seems to resolve such conflicts, it is important to consider that the legal interests protected by Competition Law and Regulatory Law are entirely different. Competition Law focuses on protecting the competitive process to foster the proper development of markets. Meanwhile, Regulatory Law seeks to ensure access to and quality of public services in strategic sectors such as energy, telecommunications, and others. As observed, both branches of law have different objectives, and the application of the Principle of Subsidiarity subordinates the goals of Competition Law, focusing solely on the legal interest protected by Regulatory Law. This situation leads to a violation of the legal interest protected by Competition Law, which in turn results in negative consequences due to the lack of competition oversight. Examples include the emergence of regulated monopolies or a decline in service quality, even in regulated markets.
The paper addresses the issues arising from the application of the Principle of Subsidiarity in normative conflicts between Competition Law and Regulatory Law within the Peruvian legal system. This principle establishes the primacy of regulatory norms over competition norms in cases of normative conflict. While this solution seems to resolve such conflicts, it is important to consider that the legal interests protected by Competition Law and Regulatory Law are entirely different. Competition Law focuses on protecting the competitive process to foster the proper development of markets. Meanwhile, Regulatory Law seeks to ensure access to and quality of public services in strategic sectors such as energy, telecommunications, and others. As observed, both branches of law have different objectives, and the application of the Principle of Subsidiarity subordinates the goals of Competition Law, focusing solely on the legal interest protected by Regulatory Law. This situation leads to a violation of the legal interest protected by Competition Law, which in turn results in negative consequences due to the lack of competition oversight. Examples include the emergence of regulated monopolies or a decline in service quality, even in regulated markets.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Libre competencia--Legislación--Perú, Derecho administrativo--Legislación--Perú, Servicios públicos--Regulación--Perú, Derechos fundamentales--Legislación--Perú