Ítem
Acceso Abierto
Trato diferencial de las personas investigadas en el proceso penal bajo los parámetros de la ley 1908 de 2018 en Colombia y la ley de enjuiciamiento criminal en España
Título de la revista
Autores
Torres Reyes, Juan Camilo
Fecha
2026-03-04
Directores
Bernate Ochoa, Francisco
Caparrós, Eduardo Fabián
Martínez Sánchez, Wilson Alejandro
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad del Rosario
Buscar en:
Métricas alternativas
Resumen
En el presente trabajo se planteó como objetivo general analizar el trato diferencial de las personas investigadas en el proceso penal bajo los parámetros de la ley 1908 de 2018 en Colombia (creada para perseguir a grupos armados organizados y grupos delincuenciales organizados) y la ley de enjuiciamiento criminal en España. Objetivo general. Analizar comparativamente el tratamiento del principio de igualdad en el proceso penal colombiano y español, con especial atención a las medidas de aseguramiento previstas en la Ley 1908 de 2018 y en la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal, a fin de determinar su compatibilidad con los estándares constitucionales e internacionales de derechos humanos. Objetivos específicos. - Delimitar el concepto de igualdad en el proceso penal según la legislación colombiana, española y organismos internacionales. - Analizar la regulación colombiana del principio de igualdad en la Constitución, la Ley 906 de 2004 y la Ley 1908 de 2018, así como la jurisprudencia relevante. - Estudiar la prevención del terrorismo y organizaciones criminales para los organismos internacionales. - Realizar un análisis comparado entre Colombia y España sobre la aplicación de medidas de aseguramiento frente a organizaciones criminales y terroristas. - Identificar los requisitos para imponer medida de aseguramiento a las personas pertenecientes a grupos armados al margen de la ley en Colombia. Metodología. El presente trabajo adopta un enfoque de investigación jurídico–cualitativo, basado en el método dogmático y comparado. En primer lugar, se realiza un análisis normativo y jurisprudencial de la legislación colombiana (Constitución, Ley 906 de 2004 y Ley 1908 de 2018), así como de la legislación española (Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal y Código Penal). Se incluyen además pronunciamientos de la Corte Constitucional, la Corte Suprema de Justicia, el Tribunal Constitucional español y el Tribunal Supremo. En segundo lugar, se emplea el método comparado, identificando semejanzas y diferencias en el tratamiento de los sujetos procesales en Colombia y España, especialmente en lo relativo a la aplicación de medidas de aseguramiento. Como fuentes primarias se utilizan las normas jurídicas vigentes; como fuentes secundarias, la jurisprudencia nacional e internacional (Corte IDH y tribunales europeos); y como fuentes terciarias, la doctrina especializada (autores nacionales y extranjeros en derecho penal y procesal). El criterio de selección de la Ley 1908 de 2018 radica en que constituye la norma más relevante en Colombia para la regulación de grupos armados organizados y del crimen organizado. Por su parte, la elección de España responde a que su modelo procesal ha servido históricamente como referente comparado en América Latina y porque ofrece un contraste valioso en el uso de medidas cautelares frente a fenómenos como el terrorismo. El alcance del estudio se limita a las medidas de aseguramiento privativas de la libertad y su relación con el principio de igualdad.
Abstract
The main objective of this research is to analyze the differential treatment of individuals under investigation in criminal proceedings, based on the parameters established by Law 1908 of 2018 in Colombia (enacted to prosecute organized armed groups and criminal organizations) and the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act. General Objective To comparatively analyze the treatment of the principle of equality in Colombian and Spanish criminal proceedings, with special attention to preventive measures provided for in Law 1908 of 2018 and the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act, in order to determine their compatibility with constitutional and international human rights standards. Specific Objectives. • To examine the theoretical and constitutional foundations of the principle of equality in criminal and procedural law. • To analyze the Colombian regulation of the principle of equality in the Constitution, Law 906 of 2004, and Law 1908 of 2018, as well as relevant jurisprudence. • To study the treatment of the principle of equality in Spanish criminal proceedings, based on the Criminal Procedure Act and decisions of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. • To carry out a comparative analysis between Colombia and Spain regarding the application of preventive measures against criminal and terrorist organizations. • To contrast both models with the standards set by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. • To propose recommendations for harmonizing Colombian legislation with international principles of equality and proportionality in criminal proceedings. 18 Methodology This research adopts a qualitative legal approach, based on dogmatic and comparative methods. First, a normative and jurisprudential analysis is conducted of Colombian legislation (the Constitution, Law 906 of 2004, and Law 1908 of 2018), as well as Spanish legislation (the Criminal Procedure Act and the Penal Code). Decisions of the Colombian Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court of Justice, the Spanish Constitutional Court, and the Spanish Supreme Court are also included. Second, the comparative method is employed to identify similarities and differences in the treatment of defendants in Colombia and Spain, particularly with regard to the application of preventive measures. Primary sources include applicable legislation; secondary sources consist of national and international case law (IACHR and European courts); and tertiary sources include specialized legal scholarship (Colombian and foreign authors in criminal and procedural law). Law 1908 of 2018 was chosen because it represents the most relevant regulation in Colombia concerning organized armed groups and organized crime. Spain was selected because its procedural model has historically served as a comparative reference in Latin America and provides a valuable contrast in the use of precautionary measures against phenomena such as terrorism. The scope of this study is limited to custodial preventive measures and their relationship with the principle of equality. Results The first chapter shows that the right to equality in criminal proceedings is a fundamental principle, under which all individuals under investigation must receive equal treatment before the law, with full respect for the right to defense, equality of arms, non- discrimination, access to justice, and the presumption of innocence. These principles are 19 recognized both in Colombia and Spain and are consistent with international standards drawn from the precedents consulted. However, the second chapter reveals that individuals investigated under Law 1908 of 2018 and the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act are not treated in accordance with the principle of equality before the law, nor with the presumption of innocence. Merely being allegedly associated with a criminal or terrorist group leads to harsher penalties, restricted benefits, extended procedural timelines for the expiration of terms, and longer periods of pre-trial detention. This leads to the conclusion that when individuals belong to armed or terrorist groups, their right to equality is restricted. The third chapter shows that the concept of equality in criminal proceedings is also restricted at the international level, as evidenced in several European Parliament conventions and guidelines, where states strengthen measures to prevent organized crime and terrorism. This often results in violations of the principles of equality in criminal proceedings, the presumption of innocence, and other rights. The fourth chapter analyzes the requirements for imposing preventive measures on defendants under ordinary Colombian law, as compared to those investigated under Law 1908 of 2018 and the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act. Similarities were found regarding constitutional purposes: whether the defendant poses a danger to society, may obstruct justice, or represents a flight risk. The fifth chapter highlights the increasing severity and deprivation of rights applied to individuals investigated in Colombia and Spain for belonging to criminal organizations. These include extended periods of pre-trial detention, restrictions on house arrest, and in Colombia, almost automatic imprisonment in correctional facilities when the individual is 20 merely suspected of belonging to an organized armed or criminal group. Additionally, the time limits for release due to the expiration of preventive detention terms are extended, even before the oral trial begins. Conclusions This study concludes that, both in Colombia and Spain, individuals associated with armed or terrorist groups do not receive the same treatment as those prosecuted for other offenses. On the contrary, they face a rigid approach, with substantially harsher penalties and a significantly reduced margin of defense.
Palabras clave
Igualdad de armas , Prisión preventiva , Presunción de inocencia , Grupo armado organizado , Grupo terrorista , Grupo de delincuencia organizada
Keywords
Equality of arms , Preventive detention , Presumption of innocence , Organized armed group , Terrorist group , Organized crime group
