This paper presents some considerations about the draft law on same–sex civil union, analyzed by the Congress of the Republic of Peru. Specifically, the impact of the beliefs of a significant number of Peruvian citizens in the delimitation of public and private ethics, due the influence of some pathologies in areas that can affect significantly fundamental rights. Instead, in this paper, are exposed some thoughts above the possibility that some religious beliefs can transcend the real of public ethics, when are used exclusively to promote fundamental rights and ensure human dignity.

This paper shows that judges often impose limitations on the use of leading questions in cross-examination during oral trials. In this sense, considering that conceptual and substantiation gaps have an unquestionable impact on the protection of human rights, the authors specify in this documentary research the inherent aspects of the concept and foundation of the right to examine and cross-examine to prevent the vagueness of these elements from causing this right to be unprotected.