Las sanciones aduaneras como medidas restrictivas del comercio: una revisión a partir de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Comunidad Andina
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2018-01-16
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
La presente tesis tiene por objetivo demostrar de qué manera las sanciones aduaneras o
sus propuestas pueden constituir medidas restrictivas al comercio contrarias al principio
de libre circulación de mercancías que protege el artículo 72 y 73 del Acuerdo de
Cartagena.
El Tribunal de Justicia de la Comunidad Andina y la Secretaría General señalan que no
se busca que toda sanción o acción de control o fiscalización realizada por las aduanas de
los Países Miembros de la Comunidad Andina deba estar, per se, sujeta a
cuestionamiento. Más bien, a través de la revisión de la jurisprudencia andina y, tras hacer
referencia a la legislación y jurisprudencia europea, ambas instituciones concluyen que
solo deben ser cuestionadas aquellas sanciones o propuestas de sanción que puedan tener
un efecto restrictivo. Para ser calificadas como restricciones al comercio, se tendrá en
cuenta si tales medidas son desproporcionales y, por tanto, injustificadas en el derecho
intracomunitario andino.
Tras analizar el principio de proporcionalidad en las sanciones aduaneras en el ámbito de
la Comunidad Andina, se estudia que dicho principio también es recogido en el Acuerdo
de Facilitación del Comercio de la Organización Mundial del Comercio. De esta manera,
el carácter vital y obligatorio que adquiere dicho principio en el marco sancionatorio
aduanero actual queda fortalecido.
Sin embargo, pese a la importancia del principio de proporcionalidad, se verifica que, a
la fecha, en el Perú su implementación todavía no es completa en el campo de las
sanciones aduaneras. En efecto, por un lado, su aplicación para el caso de las multas no
ha sido contemplada y, por otro lado, los procedimientos aduaneros legales pertinentes
que regulen la aplicación de dicho principio por la autoridad aduanera no se han expedido.
Estos problemas deben subsanarse a fin de evitar futuras disputas legales en la CAN y la
OMC sobre la posible aplicación de restricciones al comercio debido a la falta de
proporcionalidad de las sanciones.
La tesis concluye que las sanciones aduaneras, tales como las multas o las propuestas de
multas emitidas por las autoridades aduaneras de los Países Miembros de la CAN, pueden
tener un efecto restrictivo del comercio y, por ello, pueden constituir una medida de efecto
equivalente a las restricciones cuantitativas incompatibles con los artículos 72 y 73 del
Acuerdo de Cartagena.
The present thesis aims to demonstrate how customs sanctions or proposals thereof may constitute restrictive measures contrary to the principle of free movement of goods protected by Articles 72 and 73 of the Cartagena Agreement. Both the Andean Community’s Court of Justice and the General Secretariat contend that not all kind of control or supervision sanctions or actions undertaken by the customs offices of the Andean Community’s Member States should, per se, be questioned. Instead, through the revision of Andean legal precedents and, after referring to European legislation and case law, both bodies conclude that only those sanctions and actions that have a disproportionate restrictive effect should be questioned. In order to be considered trade restrictions, it should be taken into account whether such measures are disproportionate and therefore unjustified under Andean law. After analyzing the principle of proportionality concerning customs sanctions within the Andean Community, this thesis argues that the aforementioned principle is also contained in the Trade Facilitation Agreement of the World Trade Organization. Thus, this reinforces the essential and compulsory nature of such principle under the current legal framework. However, despite the importance of the principle of proportionality, at present its implementation remains incomplete in Peru concerning customs sanctions. On the one hand, its application in the case of fines has not been provided for and, on the other hand, the relevant legal customs proceedings governing the application of that principle by customs authorities have not been issued yet. These problems must be resolved to avoid future legal disputes before the Andean Community and the WTO on the possible application of trade restrictions, due to lack of proportionality of the sanctions. The thesis concludes that customs sanctions, such as fines or proposals for fines issued by the customs authorities of the Andean Community’s Member States, may have a restrictive effect on trade and may, therefore, constitute a measure having equivalent effect to the quantitative restrictions, which may lead to a violation of Articles 72 and 73 of the Cartagena Agreement.
The present thesis aims to demonstrate how customs sanctions or proposals thereof may constitute restrictive measures contrary to the principle of free movement of goods protected by Articles 72 and 73 of the Cartagena Agreement. Both the Andean Community’s Court of Justice and the General Secretariat contend that not all kind of control or supervision sanctions or actions undertaken by the customs offices of the Andean Community’s Member States should, per se, be questioned. Instead, through the revision of Andean legal precedents and, after referring to European legislation and case law, both bodies conclude that only those sanctions and actions that have a disproportionate restrictive effect should be questioned. In order to be considered trade restrictions, it should be taken into account whether such measures are disproportionate and therefore unjustified under Andean law. After analyzing the principle of proportionality concerning customs sanctions within the Andean Community, this thesis argues that the aforementioned principle is also contained in the Trade Facilitation Agreement of the World Trade Organization. Thus, this reinforces the essential and compulsory nature of such principle under the current legal framework. However, despite the importance of the principle of proportionality, at present its implementation remains incomplete in Peru concerning customs sanctions. On the one hand, its application in the case of fines has not been provided for and, on the other hand, the relevant legal customs proceedings governing the application of that principle by customs authorities have not been issued yet. These problems must be resolved to avoid future legal disputes before the Andean Community and the WTO on the possible application of trade restrictions, due to lack of proportionality of the sanctions. The thesis concludes that customs sanctions, such as fines or proposals for fines issued by the customs authorities of the Andean Community’s Member States, may have a restrictive effect on trade and may, therefore, constitute a measure having equivalent effect to the quantitative restrictions, which may lead to a violation of Articles 72 and 73 of the Cartagena Agreement.
Description
Keywords
Derecho aduanero, Aranceles de aduana--Andes, Región, Comercio internacional
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