Tanggapan Yudisial atas Undang-Undang Pembatasan Kejahatan terhadap Kemanusiaan di Peru

Abstract

This study examines the Peruvian judiciary's response to the application of Law No. 32107, a law establishing a statute of limitations for crimes against humanity, which contravenes international human rights standards, particularly those set out in the Rome Statute and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS). This study is relevant because it analyzes the legal mechanisms used by the judiciary to prevent scenarios of impunity in the face of serious human rights violations. Its primary objective is to analyze the use of diffuse control as a constitutional tool to declare the law invalid, as well as its relationship to the constitutionality and conventionality control blocks. To this end, a qualitative methodology with an analytical-descriptive approach was used, based on the analysis of judicial cases, a comparative jurisprudential study, and a critical review of national and international standards.

The results indicate that judges have based their decisions on constitutional supremacy, the State's obligation to respect international human rights treaties, and the principle of imprescriptibility of crimes against humanity. It concludes that diffuse control is a fundamental mechanism for protecting the constitutional and conventional order of the Peruvian rule of law.