La racionalidad del discurso configurador del castigo en el perú y su repercusión en los incrementos punitivos
Zegarra Rengifo, Jorge Luis
MetadatosMostrar el registro completo del ítem
The speech that Peru has made to set the punishment consists of the preventive purpose of the penalty, the principle of proportionality, guilt, human dignity, humanization of penalties, among others. The first principle (preventive end) justifies why must punish, while the other principles justify how to punish. The problem is that the preventive purpose of the penalty does not comply with the rules of purification and foundation of the theory of justification. And to that extent, the speech is not suitable for rationally set the punishment because such failure entails - in the light of the theory of justification - a potentially totalitarian punishment without material limits: discursively irrational. The empirical evidence of this is found in punitive increases carried out in Peru. So it is necessary develop a discourse that is consistent with the rules of purification and material foundation of justification. Specifically, replace the preventive purpose by an end that embodies the defense of human rights since its foundation.