Artificial Intelligence (AI) poses diverse challenges for human rights at the level of digital environments. Along with the inexorable advance of these rights, several risks arise – discrimination, replacement of human labor, forms of impact on human creativity, etc. – that must be faced through public policies that emphasize the promotion of ethical principles in the development of AI. These principles represent a point of balance between AI and human rights.

El presente artículo tiene por objeto desarrollar una visión crítica y actualizada del proceso de inconstitucionalidad en el ordenamiento constitucional peruano con la idea de brindar algunos conceptos sobre su incorporación a nuestro sistema, así como reseñar su desarrollo y funcionamiento. De la misma forma, señalamos algunos matices de este proceso sobre los intentos de modificación de los alcances de las sentencias interpretativas dado su carácter polémico. Concluimos nuestro estudio con una perspectiva de este proceso en el derecho comparado así como los retos que este proceso hoy asume para su mejora aplicativa e interpretativa.

El presente artículo desarrolla un estudio del principio de «autonomía procesal», desde la posición por la defensa del mismo en razón de su vinculación con el concepto de tutela urgente que representan los derechos fundamentales. En esa perspectiva de orden material igualmente considera una posición moderada y propone un conjunto de reglas para un mejor desarrollo de esta concepción. Reconoce, asimismo, las posiciones críticas al respecto y las examina en una propuesta de complementariedad entre el derecho procesal y la «autonomía procesal» propiamente dicha.

An approach of corrective roles of judges within the constitutional interpretation demands a number of parameters that must necessarily be made compatible with the principles, values  and guidelines pursuant to contemporary legal systems. This study covers the dimensions of these corrective roles in the attempt to set reference lines on the delicate task of the constitutional judges in the defense of the effective exercise of the fundamental rights and the regulations’ primacy of the Constitution. Finally, this study investigates if there is a jurisdictional government and to what extent the neoconstitutionalism turns out to be a relevant matter in the interpretation of the Constitution.

The history of law represents a dynamic and not a static concept, to the extent that its full conceptual understanding allows for a better understanding of the legal phenomena of the present. Similarly, the transition of Latin American countries towards republican forms of government invariably leads us to the emancipatory processes of the 19th century. We maintain that the consolidation of the idea of the rule of law was fundamental in this transition and, in this sense, represented, through the dissemination of the ideals of freedom and equality, as well as the codification and constitutionalization of the legal system, the notion of the constitutional state, as the most advanced form of the rule of law.

An approach of corrective roles of judges within the constitutional interpretation demands a number of parameters that must necessarily be made compatible with the principles, values and guidelines pursuant to contemporary legal systems. This study covers the dimensions of these corrective roles in the attempt to set reference lines on the delicate task of the constitutional judges in the defense of the effective exercise of the fundamental rights and the regulations’ primacy of the Constitution. Finally, this study investigates if there is a jurisdictional government and to what extent the neoconstitutionalism turns out to be a relevant matter in the interpretation of the Constitution.

Based on an analysis between the notions of democracy and the constitutional state, this study addresses the complex relationships between the fundamental right to freedom of education and terrorism. It is an axis of all public policy to combat terrorism within the framework of the rule of law and in that purpose, the State implements state restrictions on non-readmission for teachers sentenced for terrorism. However, it is necessary to elucidate these questions as to whether they are expressions of a culture of suspicion, or whether in their case they are measures for a legitimate defense of the same State.

This study develops the importance of constitutional justice of the Judiciary as an exclusive task, considering that law is evolving and therefore requires expertise. Furthermore, the jurisdictional treatment of fundamental rights requires certain skills that the governing bodies of the Judiciary are in the need to identify, promote and consolidate. The defense of the principles, values and guidelines underlying the constitutional State is also the task of judges and is a categorical imperative for these ones to join such material duties.

The construction of legal arguments by a judge requires the correlation of necessary concepts that identify the theory of law, the philosophy of law, the fundamental rights and the proposal of schools of legal argumentation. Our study offers a few initial thoughts on how the judicial work can be strengthened by identifying core concepts related to the proposed ideas and by providing arguments to justify them

In many ways, the COVID-19 pandemic has compromised the development of the nations, configured a number of restrictions to the fundamental rights and radically changed the lives of human beings in several negative aspects. However, there are also aspects that, as a result of the virus, are being redirected and that pose major challenges for the Judiciaries. Hence, it may be argued that these are new paradigms that allow us to rethink the judicial work and assume a relevant role in the digital transformation of the work of judges. Aspects, such as virtual hearings, the demand for investment in technology and a new approach in the role of judges to increase their use of artificial intelligence tools, imply important changes both in the present and in the years to come, and at the same time become paradigms with a view to improving the new tasks of judges.

The increasing demand on the State to fight against crime has led strongly to consider that there is a criminal law of the enemy, as stated by Günther Jakobs, which is expressed in harsher punishments, longer prison terms, among other ideas. In this regard, the trial through Units against Flagrante Delicto, as Peru has been implementing, represents a better coincidence with the criminal law of the citizen, as proposed by said author, to understand a better consolidation of human rights. Let us prosecute the crime, it is necessary, but let us do so within the framework of respect for the principle of dignity of the person.

The relationship between democracy and human rights are often progressive, in contrast to corruption, a historical phenomenon that poses regressive conditions. Establishing a link between these three concepts necessarily leads us to an attempt to reinforce democracy, as well as a desire to make human rights more effective. Therefore, reducing the harmful effects of corruption is now an urgent task for every Government, and from then on, to constantly rethink the measures needed to be taken. These are urgent challenges.

The notion of citizen security leads us to the idea of this as true human right, as there is material insufficiency in the idea of a simple demand for the security of the population. At the same time, of this correlation between citizen security and human rights it appears a strong premise: the duty of prevention that assists it does not only to the State, but to society as a whole for the construction of solid public policies regarding citizen security. It is so we forged the concept of militant citizenship.

The issues of gender-based violence represent a concern in all contemporary legal systems, and the examination of their causes and manifestations is a pending task for the regional human rights protection systems. It remains to be elucidated, in this context, the problem of visibility of gender-based violence and what is the role of society as a whole with respect to this phenomenon.

This study analyzes the social context of the State of Exception. COVID-19 have posed challenges to concepts such as social confinement, isolation and social mobility, limiting the ability to exercise Fundamental Rights. Finally, the standards of the Interamerican Human Rights systems are analyzed to adapt the interpretation of fundamental rights to comply with the provisions in the pandemic context.

The judges ratification regime, every seven years since the beginning of the judicial career in Peru, has become a complex reality. Added to this is the configuration of a new modality of partial evaluation of judges, every three and a half years. We seek to unravel that these figures are incompatible with the principle of judicial independence, the same as that in Comparative Law is expressed in a statute of indefinite appointment to the position of judge.

Based on an analysis between the notions of democracy and the constitutional state, this study addresses the complex relationships between the fundamental right to freedom of education and terrorism. It is an axis of all public policy to combat terrorism within the framework of the rule of law and in that purpose, the State implements state restrictions on non-readmission for teachers sentenced for terrorism. However, it is necessary to elucidate these questions as to whether they are expressions of a culture of suspicion, or whether in their case they are measures for a legitimate defense of the same State.

An approach of corrective roles of judges within the constitutional interpretation demands a number of parameters that must necessarily be made compatible with the principles, values  and guidelines pursuant to contemporary legal systems. This study covers the dimensions of these corrective roles in the attempt to set reference lines on the delicate task of the constitutional judges in the defense of the effective exercise of the fundamental rights and the regulations’ primacy of the Constitution. Finally, this study investigates if there is a jurisdictional government and to what extent the neoconstitutionalism turns out to be a relevant matter in the interpretation of the Constitution.

This study develops the importance of constitutional justice of the Judiciary as an exclusive task, considering that law is evolving and therefore requires expertise. Furthermore, the jurisdictional treatment of fundamental rights requires certain skills that the governing bodies of the Judiciary are in the need to identify, promote and consolidate. The defense of the principles, values and guidelines underlying the constitutional State is also the task of judges and is a categorical imperative for these ones to join such material duties.

The construction of legal arguments by a judge requires the correlation of necessary concepts that identify the theory of law, the philosophy of law, the fundamental rights and the proposal of schools of legal argumentation. Our study offers a few initial thoughts on how the judicial work can be strengthened by identifying core concepts related to the proposed ideas and by providing arguments to justify them