Documentos depositados recientemente

  • listelement.badge.dso-typeÍtem,
    La Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo General después del Decreto Legislativo N.º 1272: diez modificaciones pendientes para una Administración más predecible
    (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2025-11-05) Montenegro Monteza, Favio Martín
    The article examines the reforms introduced by Legislative Decree No. 1272 to Peru’s General Administrative Procedure Law (LPAG) and proposes ten amendments to enhance its effectiveness and predictability. Key suggestions include: extending expiration rules to the appeal stage, applying LPAG provisions to oversight activities, suspending all measures when appeals are filed, reinforcing reasoning in administrative acts, safeguarding the use of reconsideration, clarifying the scope of voluntary correction, standardizing measure terminology, fixing the tax unit (UIT) based on the date of the offense, regulating mitigating factors for non-monetary sanctions, and removing the requirement for new evidence in certain reconsiderations. These improvements aim to reduce arbitrariness, ensure legal certainty, and optimize administrative performance.
  • listelement.badge.dso-typeÍtem,
    Colaboración y sanción corporativa: whistleblowing, investigaciones internas y el dilema de la prueba ilícita
    (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2025-11-04) Goena Vives, Beatriz
    The article analyzes corporate cooperation within the framework of corporate criminal liability, highlighting its role as an instrument of reactive prevention rather than as a retributive sanction. It studies the comparative evolution of different legal systems —United States, countries of the Germanic tradition, Europe, and Ibero-America— regarding the incentives for companies to cooperate with the authorities through confession, reparation, improvement of compliance, and internal investigations. Special attention is given to the problems raised by cooperation when it relies on evidence obtained illegally, both by internal whistleblowers and in the context of corporate investigations. The paper examines the tension between encouraging cooperation and respecting fundamental rights, proposing clear limits: cooperation should not be the sole criterion for exemption from liability, and information obtained in violation of guarantees cannot justify procedural benefits.
  • listelement.badge.dso-typeÍtem,
    La restricción de la libertad de la empresa – La responsabilidad de las personas jurídicas y una historia casi irracional en Alemania
    (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2025-11-04) Beckemper, Katharina
    Germany is one of the few countries that has not codified the penal liability of legal entities. This is mainly due to the fact that the dogmatic basis in Germany is different from that in many other countries. Nevertheless, the debate has been intense for many decades, with the main aim being to establish the dogmatic basis for the liability of legal entities. In recent years, however, the debate has taken a different direction. This is mainly due to international developments, but also to events in Germany itself. The Siemens case played a prominent role in this, raising the question, which has been the subject of intense debate in Germany, of whether the results of internal investigations may be seized by the public prosecutor’s office. The draft of the Penal Liability of Associations (Verbandssanktionengesetz) has devoted specific rules to this problem, which have no international precedent. This article traces the discussion in Germany and provides an insight into the failed project.
  • listelement.badge.dso-typeÍtem,
    Sobre la naturaleza jurídica de los modelos de prevención de delitos como eximente de la responsabilidad penal de la persona jurídica
    (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2025-11-04) Gómez Martín, Víctor
    Circular 1/2016 of the State Attorney General’s Office of Spain points out that the question relating to the legal nature of the crime prevention models referred to by the CP after the 2015 reform depends on the solution adopted before the no less controversial question of the nature of the model for attributing criminal liability to the legal entity. Without prejudice to other suggestive approaches, the positions held on the matter that has just been raised are divided, in essence, into two large groups: those according to which the reference exemption from criminal liability would be due to the exclusion of the categories of atypicality or guilt, on the one hand; and those that consider, on the other hand, that the compliance defense would be linked, instead, to punishability. In the following lines, these positions will be presented and critically evaluated, as well as the conceptual budgets from which they start, to later develop my own personal positioning.
  • listelement.badge.dso-typeÍtem,
    Legalidad flexible y discrecionalidad judicial en el sistema italiano de la responsabilidad penal de las personas jurídicas
    (Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2025-11-04) Mongillo, Vincenzo
    The essay analyzes the role of discretion within the system of corporate liability established in Italy by Legislative Decree No. 231/2001, highlighting the flexibility of the constitutive elements of the “corporate” offense arising from the commission of crimes, the persistent uncertainties regarding the assessment of organizational defects, and the breadth of judicial power in determining corporate sanctions. It underscores how a proper channeling of discretion—guided by the normative telos and, in particular, by the aims of ex ante prevention and ex post reparation—can help strengthen the effectiveness and rationality of the system, reducing the risks of arbitrariness and excessive unpredictability in judicial decisions. The paper concludes by identifying possible avenues for reform aimed at consolidating normative determination and achieving a balance between efficiency requirements and safeguards.