Inconstitucionalidad del art. 57 del código orgánico integral penal

Recidivism has been approached from an anthropological doctrine ethicist, breach alleged by the Constitution, which gives constitutional rights and guarantees with their respective principles, and at the same time ensures its full compliance. The existing Criminal Code of Integral, states in Art. 57.- Recidivism, "recidivism is defined as the commission of a new crime by the person who was convicted by final judgment. Recidivism in crimes only proceed with the same elements of typicality of fraud and guilt respectively. If the person repeats will impose the maximum penalty under the criminal increased by a third", breaking the Constitution in Article 11, paragraph two, Article 76 paragraph seventh, literal i) and Section 424....; since it can not be imposed a penalty because of the criminal record of the person as stipulated in the Constitution but, based on the unlawful act committed, moreover, the right to defense guarantees that no one shall be tried more than once for the same cause and matter. Finally, the Constitution takes precedence over any other rule of law, and in turn, they must comply with constitutional provisions, otherwise will have no legal effect. The fact aggravate it suggests that the crimes charged in the cases framed within the scope of Recidivism are the result of a criminal record qualified as discriminatory, since it joined the concepts of "habitual" and "dangerousness" which is a predisposition or habit of committing crimes; so it is tried again for an act already committed, contrary to the principle of

• Autor Principal: Rojas Jiménez, Stephanye Karolina (author)
• Formato: bachelorThesis
• Idioma: spa
• Publicado: 2017
• Subjects: DERECHO; INCONSTITUCIONALIDAD; ARTÍCULO 57; CÒDIGO ORGÁNICO INTEGRAL PENAL
• Acceso en liña: http://dspace.unl.edu.ec/jspui/handle/123456789/19946