¿Cómo diferenciar los estereotipos de género de las máximas de experiencia?: evaluación crítica de las propuestas doctrinarias y el ensayo de una alternativa
Date
2024-05-20
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
En la presente tesis, abordamos la confusión recurrente entre máximas de experiencia
válidas y estereotipos de género en la labor judicial de la valoración de la prueba penal.
Consideramos que esta confusión no solo genera problemas en la valoración y
motivación de la prueba, sino que también impacta directamente en las decisiones
judiciales, permitiendo un amplio margen de errores que resultan en la impunidad de
delitos relacionados con la violencia de género. Esta problemática ha impulsado la
propuesta de alternativas desde sectores doctrinarios y sociales, que buscan responder a la
interrogante de cómo diferenciar las máximas de experiencia de los estereotipos de
género. En ese sentido, el objetivo principal de este trabajo es comprender la naturaleza
de estos conceptos y determinar una vía idónea para lograr su diferenciación. En los
primeros capítulos, realizaremos un estudio epistémico de las máximas de experiencia y
los estereotipos de género, así como su actuación dentro de la inferencia judicial.
Finalmente, examinaremos las aproximaciones doctrinarias para distinguir los
estereotipos de género de las máximas de experiencia válidamente formuladas,
culminando con la propuesta de una solución desde la argumentación jurídica para lograr
nuestro objetivo principal.
In this thesis, we address the recurrent confusion between valid maxims of experience and gender stereotypes in the judicial work of evaluating criminal evidence. We consider that this confusion not only generates problems in the assessment and motivation of evidence, but also has a direct impact on judicial decisions, allowing a wide margin of errors that result in the impunity of crimes related to gender violence. This problem has prompted the proposal of alternatives from doctrinal and social sectors, which seek to answer the question of how to differentiate the maxims of experience and gender stereotypes. Therefore, the main objective of this work is to understand the nature of these concepts and to determine a suitable way to achieve their differentiation. In the first chapters, we will carry out an epistemic study of the maxims of experience and gender stereotypes, as well as their performance within judicial inference. Finally, we will examine the doctrinal approaches to distinguish gender stereotypes from validly formulated maxims of experience, culminating with the proposal of a solution from legal argumentation to achieve our main objective.
In this thesis, we address the recurrent confusion between valid maxims of experience and gender stereotypes in the judicial work of evaluating criminal evidence. We consider that this confusion not only generates problems in the assessment and motivation of evidence, but also has a direct impact on judicial decisions, allowing a wide margin of errors that result in the impunity of crimes related to gender violence. This problem has prompted the proposal of alternatives from doctrinal and social sectors, which seek to answer the question of how to differentiate the maxims of experience and gender stereotypes. Therefore, the main objective of this work is to understand the nature of these concepts and to determine a suitable way to achieve their differentiation. In the first chapters, we will carry out an epistemic study of the maxims of experience and gender stereotypes, as well as their performance within judicial inference. Finally, we will examine the doctrinal approaches to distinguish gender stereotypes from validly formulated maxims of experience, culminating with the proposal of a solution from legal argumentation to achieve our main objective.
Description
Keywords
Prueba (Derecho)--Perú, Derecho procesal--Perú, Sexo y derecho--Perú