This paper provides an overview of the recent amendment to the Peruvian Code of Constitutional Procedure on the constitutional procedure of habeas corpus in cases of violation, threat or restriction of personal liberty in the context of criminal proceedings. An a contrario sensu interpretation of Law No. 23506 and its complementary law has established that habeas corpus would be applied in the case of irregular procedures, although the law does not explicitly state this. Consequently, in order for habeas corpus to be valid, the irregular procedure had to be directly related to the violation of constitutional guarantees such as due process and effective judicial protection, and this violation had to affect, threaten or limit personal liberty. The absence of an explicit rule led the Code of Constitutional Procedure to state textually that habeas corpus proceedings may be brought against fi...

No contiene resumen

No contiene resumen

El artículo no presenta resumen.

No contiene resumen

This paper provides an overview of the recent amendment to the Peruvian Code of Constitutional Procedure on the constitutional procedure of habeas corpus in cases of violation, threat or restriction of personal liberty in the context of criminal proceedings. An a contrario sensu interpretation of Law No. 23506 and its complementary law has established that habeas corpus would be applied in the case of irregular procedures, although the law does not explicitly state this. Consequently, in order for habeas corpus to be valid, the irregular procedure had to be directly related to the violation of constitutional guarantees such as due process and effective judicial protection, and this violation had to affect, threaten or limit personal liberty. The absence of an explicit rule led the Code of Constitutional Procedure to state textually that habeas corpus proceedings may be brought against fi...