Prisión permanente revisable y su viabilidad jurídica en el Ecuador
Fecha
2021-04
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad de Guayaquil, Facultad de Jurisprudencia Ciencias Sociales y Políticas
Resumen
En este trabajo nos planteamos como objetivo determinar si la pena de prisión permanente revisable es viable o no jurídicamente en el ordenamiento jurídico ecuatoriano. En primer lugar, realizamos un repaso de todos los países que aplican están sanción tanto en Europa como en América del Sur aunque con otros nombres-. Luego de llevar a cabo una revisión minuciosa de los fallos del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos -TEDH- y de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos -Corte IDH, arribamos a la conclusión de que, por un lado, el TEDH tiene una clara línea jurisprudencial que ratifica que, al menos para los países de la Unión Europea, esta pena si bien podría ser permanente, al contemplar el derecho de que la pena se revise, no vulnera los derechos humanos de los condenados, por no constituir, tortura, ni trato cruel, ni inhumano, ni degradante. Por otro lado, la Corte IDH, en los casos relacionados a la cadena perpetua que se encuentra vigente en Argentina, Chile y Perú, no condena per se dicha pena, ni ha sugerida expresamente que sea derogada, por contemplar la posibilidad de que la privación de libertad sea revisada. Finalmente, se lleva a cabo un análisis doctrinario de los artículos 201 de la Constitución de la República del Ecuador que establece cual es el fin del sistema penitenciario ecuatoriano, y del artículo 52 del COIP que establece cuales son los fines de las penas en el Ecuador, a fin de corroborar que la pena de prisión permanente revisable, al condicionar la revocatoria de la privación de libertad a la efectiva rehabilitación del condenado, no vulnera dichas disposiciones.
In this work we set ourselves the objective of determining whether or not the reviewable permanent prison sentence is legally viable in the Ecuadorian legal system. In the first place, we carry out a review of all the countries that apply this sanction both in Europe and in South America -although with other names-. After conducting a meticulous review of the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights -ECDH- and of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights -Inter-American Court, we came to the conclusion that, on the one hand, the ECHR has a clear jurisprudential line which ratifies that, at least for the countries of the European Union, this penalty, although it could be permanent, considering the right to have the sentence reviewed, does not violate the human rights of the convicted, because it does not constitute, torture, or treatment cruel, not inhuman, not degrading. On the other hand, the Inter-American Court, in the cases related to life imprisonment that is in force in Argentina, Chile and Peru, does not condemn said penalty per se, nor has it expressly suggested that it be repealed, as it contemplates the possibility that the deprivation freedom is reviewed. Finally, a doctrinal analysis of articles 201 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador is carried out, which establishes the purpose of the Ecuadorian prison system, and of article 52 of the COIP, which establishes the purposes of penalties in Ecuador, in order to corroborate that the reviewable permanent prison sentence, by conditioning the revocation of the deprivation of liberty to the effective rehabilitation of the convicted person, does not violate said provisions.
In this work we set ourselves the objective of determining whether or not the reviewable permanent prison sentence is legally viable in the Ecuadorian legal system. In the first place, we carry out a review of all the countries that apply this sanction both in Europe and in South America -although with other names-. After conducting a meticulous review of the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights -ECDH- and of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights -Inter-American Court, we came to the conclusion that, on the one hand, the ECHR has a clear jurisprudential line which ratifies that, at least for the countries of the European Union, this penalty, although it could be permanent, considering the right to have the sentence reviewed, does not violate the human rights of the convicted, because it does not constitute, torture, or treatment cruel, not inhuman, not degrading. On the other hand, the Inter-American Court, in the cases related to life imprisonment that is in force in Argentina, Chile and Peru, does not condemn said penalty per se, nor has it expressly suggested that it be repealed, as it contemplates the possibility that the deprivation freedom is reviewed. Finally, a doctrinal analysis of articles 201 of the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador is carried out, which establishes the purpose of the Ecuadorian prison system, and of article 52 of the COIP, which establishes the purposes of penalties in Ecuador, in order to corroborate that the reviewable permanent prison sentence, by conditioning the revocation of the deprivation of liberty to the effective rehabilitation of the convicted person, does not violate said provisions.
Descripción
Palabras clave
PRISIÓN PERMANENTE REVISABLE, CADENA PERPETUA, PRIVACIÓN DE LIBERTAD.