Análisis de la Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional sobre la Vacancia Presidencial por Permanente Incapacidad Moral y una propuesta para su adecuada interpretación
Date
2024-03-06
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
El presente artículo abordará el tema del análisis a la Sentencia expedida por el
Tribunal Constitucional sobre la Vacancia Presidencial por Permanente Incapacidad
Moral, N° 778/2020 (Expediente 00002-2020-CC/TC). El problema principal que se
plantea en este trabajo académico es si los magistrados del Tribunal Constitucional
resolvieron bien la sentencia correspondiente ante la posibilidad de que se
pronunciaran acerca de la controversia de fondo, analizando sobre todo los votos
singulares que cada uno de los magistrados emitió y a través de los cuales dejaron
ver sus posiciones ante la problemática. Luego de analizada la Sentencia y los
fundamentos de votos de cada uno de los magistrados, se entra a proponer una
alternativa de lineamientos a tomar en cuenta para una correcta interpretación
constitucional, amparándose en márgenes de razonabilidad y objetividad.
Finalmente, se concluye con una reflexión ante la crisis política que nos aqueja
desde hace más de seis años.
This article will address the topic of the analysis of the Ruling issued by the Constitutional Court on the Presidential Vacancy due to Permanent Moral Incapacity, No. 778/2020 (File 00002-2020-CC/TC). The main problem that arises in this academic work is whether the magistrates of the Constitutional Court resolved the corresponding sentence correctly given the possibility of them ruling on the underlying controversy, analyzing above all the singular votes that each of the magistrates issued and through which they revealed their positions on the problem. After analyzing the Sentence and the reasons for the votes of each of the judges, an alternative of guidelines to be taken into account for a correct constitutional interpretation is proposed, based on margins of reasonableness and objectivity. Finally, it concludes with a reflection on the political crisis that has plagued us for more than six years.
This article will address the topic of the analysis of the Ruling issued by the Constitutional Court on the Presidential Vacancy due to Permanent Moral Incapacity, No. 778/2020 (File 00002-2020-CC/TC). The main problem that arises in this academic work is whether the magistrates of the Constitutional Court resolved the corresponding sentence correctly given the possibility of them ruling on the underlying controversy, analyzing above all the singular votes that each of the magistrates issued and through which they revealed their positions on the problem. After analyzing the Sentence and the reasons for the votes of each of the judges, an alternative of guidelines to be taken into account for a correct constitutional interpretation is proposed, based on margins of reasonableness and objectivity. Finally, it concludes with a reflection on the political crisis that has plagued us for more than six years.
Description
Keywords
Acusación constitucional--Perú, Derecho constitucional--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Presidencialismo--Aspectos morales y éticos--Perú, Tribunales constitucionales--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Derecho constitucional--Interpretación
Citation
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess