Informe Jurídico sobre la Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 918/2021 – Caso del Desdoblamiento de las Legislaturas Ordinarias
No hay miniatura disponible
Fecha
2023-04-24
Autores
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
DOI
Resumen
El presente Informe tiene como objetivo exponer y analizar los razonamientos del
Tribunal Constitucional en la sentencia relativa al caso del desdoblamiento de las
legislaturas ordinarias por parte del Congreso de la República. La disolución del
parlamento por parte del ex presidente Martín Vizcarra mediante Decreto Supremo
165-2019-PCM en septiembre del año 2019, trajo como consecuencia la elección de
un nuevo Congreso, destinado a completar el período parlamentario 2016 – 2021.
Cuando éste estaba por culminar, en junio del año 2021, el Congreso introdujo,
mediante Resolución Legislativa 021-2020-2021-CR, una modificación a la tercera
disposición transitoria del Reglamento del Congreso, creando una cuarta legislatura
ordinaria, con el objetivo de aprobar, en segunda votación, proyectos de leyes de
reforma constitucional, de acuerdo a los requisitos que establece el artículo 206 de la
Constitución. La Resolución Legislativa fue cuestionada en un proceso de acción de
inconstitucionalidad. El Tribunal Constitucional declaró fundada la demanda e
inconstitucionales la Resolución Legislativa 021-2020-2021-CR, así como, por
consecuencia, las tres leyes de reforma constitucional aprobadas durante la cuarta
legislatura ordinaria irregular, argumentando que el Congreso había cumplido tan solo
en las apariencias con los requisitos que la Constitución exige para su reforma en el
artículo 206.
The purpose of this paper is to expose and analyze the reasoning of the Constitutional Court in the ruling on the case of the division of ordinary legislatures by the Congress of the Republic. The dissolution of parliament by former President Martín Vizcarra through Supreme Decree 165-2019-PCM in September 2019, resulted in the election of a new Congress, intended to complete the 2016-2021 parliamentary period. When it was about to end, in June 2021, Congress introduced, through Legislative Resolution 021-2020-2021-CR, a modification to the third transitory provision of the Regulations of Congress, creating a fourth ordinary legislature, with the objective of approving, in second vote, constitutional reform bills, in accordance with the requirements established in article 206 of the Constitution. The Legislative Resolution was questioned in an unconstitutionality action process. The Constitutional Court declared the lawsuit founded and Legislative Resolution 021-2020-2021-CR unconstitutional, as well as, consequently, the three constitutional reform laws approved during the irregular fourth ordinary legislature, arguing that Congress had complied only in the appearances with the requirements that the Constitution demands for its reform in article 206.
The purpose of this paper is to expose and analyze the reasoning of the Constitutional Court in the ruling on the case of the division of ordinary legislatures by the Congress of the Republic. The dissolution of parliament by former President Martín Vizcarra through Supreme Decree 165-2019-PCM in September 2019, resulted in the election of a new Congress, intended to complete the 2016-2021 parliamentary period. When it was about to end, in June 2021, Congress introduced, through Legislative Resolution 021-2020-2021-CR, a modification to the third transitory provision of the Regulations of Congress, creating a fourth ordinary legislature, with the objective of approving, in second vote, constitutional reform bills, in accordance with the requirements established in article 206 of the Constitution. The Legislative Resolution was questioned in an unconstitutionality action process. The Constitutional Court declared the lawsuit founded and Legislative Resolution 021-2020-2021-CR unconstitutional, as well as, consequently, the three constitutional reform laws approved during the irregular fourth ordinary legislature, arguing that Congress had complied only in the appearances with the requirements that the Constitution demands for its reform in article 206.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Reformas constitucionales--Perú, Derecho constitucional--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Recurso de inconstitucionalidad--Jurisprudencia--Perú
Citación
Colecciones
item.page.endorsement
item.page.review
item.page.supplemented
item.page.referenced
Licencia Creative Commons
Excepto se indique lo contrario, la licencia de este artículo se describe como info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess