El control judicial de la colaboración eficaz en casos de corrupción estructural
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
La corrupción estructural constituye una de las modalidades más graves de
corrupción. Y en el Perú, se manifiesta como un fenómeno sistémico que
trasciende actos individuales y se enraíza en las instituciones públicas y
privadas, debilitando su legitimidad y comprometiendo la confianza ciudadana
en el Estado. En ese contexto, es que la colaboración eficaz ha sido concebida
como un mecanismo procesal especial para desarticular redes delictivas de gran
complejidad, mediante incentivos a los imputados que deciden cooperar con la
justicia. Sin embargo, su éxito no depende únicamente del aporte del
colaborador, sino también de la firmeza y transparencia del control judicial que
garantiza la legalidad del acuerdo. El presente artículo tiene por finalidad
examinar el funcionamiento del control judicial en los procesos de colaboración
eficaz relacionados con la corrupción estructural, a partir de tres ejes analíticos:
la legalidad, la proporcionalidad y la legitimidad. Se busca, con ello, identificar en
qué medida el juez asume un rol de garante sustantivo frente a eventuales
abusos o desequilibrios en la negociación, asegurando que este procedimiento
excepcional cumpla su finalidad dentro del marco del debido proceso. En
consecuencia, se sostiene que el fortalecimiento del rol judicial resulta esencial
para que la colaboración eficaz contribuya efectivamente al desmantelamiento
de redes corruptas sin comprometer los principios del Estado de derecho.
Structural corruption constitutes one of the most serious forms of corruption. In Peru, it manifests as a systemic phenomenon that transcends individual acts and becomes entrenched within public and private institutions, undermining their legitimacy and eroding citizens’ trust in the State. In this context, effective collaboration has been conceived as a special procedural mechanism aimed at dismantling highly complex criminal networks through incentives granted to defendants who choose to cooperate with justice. However, its success depends not only on the information provided by the collaborator but also on the firmness and transparency of judicial oversight, which ensures the legality of the agreement. The purpose of this article is to examine how judicial control operates in effective collaboration proceedings related to structural corruption, based on three analytical dimensions: legality, proportionality, and legitimacy. The aim is to identify the extent to which the judge acts as a substantive guarantor against potential abuses or imbalances in the negotiation process, ensuring that this exceptional procedure fulfills its purpose within the framework of due process. Consequently, it is argued that strengthening the judicial role is essential for effective collaboration to contribute effectively to the dismantling of corrupt networks without compromising the principles of the rule of law.
Structural corruption constitutes one of the most serious forms of corruption. In Peru, it manifests as a systemic phenomenon that transcends individual acts and becomes entrenched within public and private institutions, undermining their legitimacy and eroding citizens’ trust in the State. In this context, effective collaboration has been conceived as a special procedural mechanism aimed at dismantling highly complex criminal networks through incentives granted to defendants who choose to cooperate with justice. However, its success depends not only on the information provided by the collaborator but also on the firmness and transparency of judicial oversight, which ensures the legality of the agreement. The purpose of this article is to examine how judicial control operates in effective collaboration proceedings related to structural corruption, based on three analytical dimensions: legality, proportionality, and legitimacy. The aim is to identify the extent to which the judge acts as a substantive guarantor against potential abuses or imbalances in the negotiation process, ensuring that this exceptional procedure fulfills its purpose within the framework of due process. Consequently, it is argued that strengthening the judicial role is essential for effective collaboration to contribute effectively to the dismantling of corrupt networks without compromising the principles of the rule of law.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Derecho procesal penal--Perú, Corrupción--Perú, Control jurisdiccional--Perú, Investigación criminal--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto donde se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este ítem se describe como https://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
