Efectos de la sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional que declaró la inconstitucionalidad del artículo 46° de la Ley n° 27785, incorporado por la Ley n° 29622, respecto a la potestad sancionadora de la Contraloría General de la República
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2022-03-16
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
La presente investigación, comprende un análisis sobre los efectos que la declaratoria de
inconstitucionalidad del artículo 46° de la Ley N° 27785, emitida por el Tribunal
Constitucional en el Expediente N° 00020-2015-PI/TC, ha ocasionado sobre la potestad
sancionadora de la Contraloría General de la República; así como, explorar de manera
referencial los efectos que la falta del ejercicio de la potestad sancionadora de dicha
Entidad, ha ocasionado respecto a la lucha contra la corrupción y la inconducta funcional;
y, a su vez, realizar un breve análisis respecto a los argumentos planteados en la demanda
de inconstitucionalidad contra la Ley N° 31288, que cuestionan la nueva tipificación de
las conductas infractoras. Para tal efecto, en la investigación se ha recurrido a la consulta
bibliográfica, hemerográfica, documental, normativa, así como a la búsqueda en recursos
de internet, tales como blogs y noticias. Como conclusiones de la investigación, se tiene
que no obstante el reconocimiento de la potestad sancionadora de la Contraloría, dicha
Entidad no ha podido sancionar a los servidores y funcionarios públicos que incurrieron
en inconducta funcional por más de dos años; que los procedimientos administrativos
sancionadores que estaban en trámite, han debido ser concluidos por la imposibilidad
jurídica de continuarlos; que en el lapso de tiempo en que la Contraloría no pudo ejercer
su facultad sancionadora, miles de funcionarios públicos involucrados en inconductas
funcionales, no han podido ser sancionados, ocasionándose perjuicio para la
Administración Pública; y, que el análisis de la nueva tipificación de las infracciones
introducidas por el TC, debe realizarse caso por caso y teniendo en cuenta la definición
de conceptos jurídicos indeterminados y la tipificación indirecta.
This investigation includes an analysis of the effects that the declaration of unconstitutionality of Article 46 of Law No. 27785, issued by the Constitutional Court in File No. 00020-2015-PI / TC, has caused on the sanctioning capacity of the Government Accountability Office; as well as, to explore in a referential way the effects that the lack of exercise of the sanctioning capacity, has caused regarding the fight against corruption and functional misconduct; and, in turn, carry out a brief analysis of the arguments raised in the unconstitutionality claim against Law No. 31288, which question the new classification of the offending conducts. For this purpose, the research has resorted to the bibliographic, hemerographic, documentary, and normative consultation, as well as the search in internet resources, such as blogs and news. As conclusions of the investigation, it is necessary to say that despite the recognition of the sanctioning capacity of the Government Accountability Office, this Entity has not been able to sanction the public servants and officials who incurred in functional misconduct for more than two years; also, the administrative sanctioning procedures that were in process must have been concluded, due to the legal impossibility of continuing them; moreover, in the period of time in which the Government Accountability Office was unable to exercise its sanctioning capacity, thousands of public officials involved in functional misconduct have not been able to be sanctioned, causing damage to the Public Administration; and, in addition, the analysis of the new classification of the infractions introduced by the Constitutional Court, must be carried out on a case-by-case, and taking into account the definition of undetermined legal concepts and the indirect typing.
This investigation includes an analysis of the effects that the declaration of unconstitutionality of Article 46 of Law No. 27785, issued by the Constitutional Court in File No. 00020-2015-PI / TC, has caused on the sanctioning capacity of the Government Accountability Office; as well as, to explore in a referential way the effects that the lack of exercise of the sanctioning capacity, has caused regarding the fight against corruption and functional misconduct; and, in turn, carry out a brief analysis of the arguments raised in the unconstitutionality claim against Law No. 31288, which question the new classification of the offending conducts. For this purpose, the research has resorted to the bibliographic, hemerographic, documentary, and normative consultation, as well as the search in internet resources, such as blogs and news. As conclusions of the investigation, it is necessary to say that despite the recognition of the sanctioning capacity of the Government Accountability Office, this Entity has not been able to sanction the public servants and officials who incurred in functional misconduct for more than two years; also, the administrative sanctioning procedures that were in process must have been concluded, due to the legal impossibility of continuing them; moreover, in the period of time in which the Government Accountability Office was unable to exercise its sanctioning capacity, thousands of public officials involved in functional misconduct have not been able to be sanctioned, causing damage to the Public Administration; and, in addition, the analysis of the new classification of the infractions introduced by the Constitutional Court, must be carried out on a case-by-case, and taking into account the definition of undetermined legal concepts and the indirect typing.
Description
Keywords
Sanciones administrativas--Perú, Procedimiento administrativo--Perú, Corrupción administrativa--Perú
Citation
Collections
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