The Application of Habituality in Peruvian Criminal Legislation and Its Impact on the Presumption of Innocence
Abstract
The concept of habituality provided for in Article 46-C of the Criminal Code has undergone a series of changes over the years, which indicates that the criminal policy promoted by the State has proven insufficient.
Likewise, the application of this article has raised a number of problems, which is why, at the IV Jurisdictional Plenary of the Permanent, Transitory, and Special Criminal Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic, Plenary Agreement No. 1-008/CJ-116 was issued. This agreement establishes as binding case law that, for habituality to be established, no prior conviction—that is, no declaration of criminal liability—is required. However, over the course of these years, some justice system actors have taken the view that, for this legal concept to operate, it is not enough merely to commit an intentional offense in accordance with the terms of the agreement, but that a declaration of criminal liability is indispensable in order not to infringe the principle of the presumption of innocence.
For these reasons, this article seeks to determine how Article 46-C of the Criminal Code, which regulates the legal concept of habituality, undermines the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence, enshrined in Article 2, paragraph 24(e), of the 1993 Political Constitution.
Downloads
Métricas alternativas
References
Acosta, N. (2010). Tratamiento de la reincidencia y la habitualidad en la jurisprudencia nacional. https://wold.fder.edu.uy/contenido/penal/pdf/2010/reincidencia-y-habitualidad_informe-final.pdf
Arbulú, J. (s. f.). Política criminal contra la inseguridad ciudadana. Comentarios a la Ley n.º 30076. https://perso.unifr.ch/derechopenal/assets/files/articulos/a_20131008_03.pdf
Cárdenas, R. (2006). La presunción de inocencia. (2.a ed.). Porrúa. Catacora, M. (1994). De la presunción al principio de inocencia. Vox Juris. Revista de Derecho, (4), 21-37.
Flores, P. (1984). Diccionario de términos jurídicos (t. II). Editores Importadores.
Hurtado, J. (2005). Manual de derecho penal. Parte general I (3.a ed.). Grijley.
Jiménez de Asúa, L. (1958). Principios del derecho penal. La ley y el delito (3.a ed.). Sudamericana.
Luján, M. (2013). Diccionario penal y procesal penal. Gaceta Jurídica.
Oré, E. (2013). Determinación judicial de la pena. Reincidencia y habitualidad. A propósito de las modificaciones operadas por la Ley 30076. https://perso.unifr.ch/derechopenal/assets/files/articulos/a_20131108_03.pdf
Peña Cabrera, A. R. (1988). Derecho penal. Parte general. Rodhas.
Peña Cabrera, A. R. (2017). Derecho penal. Parte general (2.a ed.). Rodhas. Quispe, F. (2003). El derecho a la presunción de inocencia (2.a ed.). Palestra.
Romero, J. E. (1972). Algunas notas acerca del Código penal de Costa Rica. Anuario de Derecho Penal y Ciencias Penales, (2), 425-458. https://www.boe.es/biblioteca_juridica/anuarios_derecho/abrir_pdf.php?id=ANU-P-1972-20042500458
San Martín, C. (2003). Derecho procesal penal (2.a ed., t. I). Grijley. Sánchez, P. (2004). Manual de derecho procesal penal. IDEMSA.
Fuentes normativas y jurisprudenciales
Acuerdo Plenario n.º 1-2008/CJ-116 (2008). Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (18 de julio de 2016). https://www.pj.gob.pe/wps/wcm/connect/d63f9f804bc529b18c57dd40a5645add/Acuerdo+Plenario+1-2008.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=d63f9f804bc529b18c57dd40a5645add
Casación n.º 50-2018-Lima (2018). Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (17 de octubre de 2018).
Casación n.º 30-2018-Huaura (2019). Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (22 de mayo de 2019).
Casación n.º 2211-2019-La Libertad (2022). Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (18 de febrero de 2022).
Caso Herrera Ulloa vs. Costa Rica (2004). Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Sentencia de 2 de julio de 2004.
Expediente n.º 618-2005-HC/TC (2005). Tribunal Constitucional (8 de marzo de 2005). https://tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2005/00618-2005-HC.html
Expediente n.º 0014-2006-PI/TC (2006). Tribunal Constitucional (14 de junio de 2006). https://tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2007/00014-2006-AI.pdf
Expediente n.º 04765-2016-PHC/TC (2019). Tribunal Constitucional (23 de enero de 2019).
Pleno Jurisdiccional Distrital en Materia Penal (2016). Corte Superior de Justicia de Áncash (30 de septiembre de 2016). https://img.lpderecho.pe/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Pleno-Jurisdiccional-Distrital-Penal-de-Ancash-2016-LPDerecho.pdf
Recurso de Nulidad n.º 2479-2016-Áncash (2017). Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República (4 de abril de 2017).
Copyright (c) 2025 Lisdey Magaly Bueno Flores
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain their copyrights and register under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows the use of the published material (adapt - remix, transform and build - and share - copy and redistribute - the material in any medium or format).
1. The journal allows authors to retain their copyrights of submitted articles without any restrictions.
2. Authors retain the right to share, distribute, copy, perform and publicly communicate the article published in Revista Oficial del Poder Judicial (e.g., place it in an institutional repository).
3. Authors retain the right to make a subsequent publication of their work, to use the article or any part of it (for example: a compilation of their work, notes for conferences, thesis, or for a book), as long as they indicate the source of publication (authors of the work, journal, volume, number and date).
