Este trabajo es un estudio crítico sobre los tribunales de drogas (TD) en Chile. Para esto, se analiza el contexto normativo en el que nacen dentro de la legislación penal en materia de tráfico ilícito de estupefacientes. Sin perjuicio de valorar la existencia de tratamientos contra las drogas, cuestionamos que los TD sean una alternativa al encarcelamiento. Más bien, se trata de un aumento de la red punitiva que sirve de complemento al punitivismo extremo en la legislación penal sobre drogas. Asimismo, por los requisitos de elegibilidad establecidos en los TD chilenos, se impide la posibilidad de un tratamiento para muchas personas que podrían requerirlo, toda vez que en la forma actual los TD combinan y confunden criterios de salud pública con nociones de peligrosidad. En las conclusiones recomendamos la mantención y el aumento presupuestario de los tratamientos contra las drogas. No obstante, sugerimos la separación de las valoraciones o imputaciones jurídico-penales de los criterios de salud pública. Asimismo, como política pública en materia penal sobre drogas, recomendamos la despenalización de conductas y la disminución de sanciones para construir un camino real descarcelatorio y respetuoso de la dignidad humana.
This paper aims to study the War on Drugs and its consequences in the Andean countries (Colombia, Peru and Bolivia). It analyses the way in which the United States internationalization of a criminal political discourse, resulted on a punitivist ideology separated from human rights when responding to the drug problem in these countries. The study begins with an incursion into the legal, political and social aspects of the origin of the discourse of the War on Drugs in the United States and the Andean countries. It continues with the presentation of the results and the current state of the political response to coca cultivation in each of these countries. The work closes with an exposition of the most visible consequences of the war on drugs in the Andean countries, characterized by the increase in prison overcrowding, the selective criminal prosecution of marginalized groups and mass incarceration. Regarding the methodology, it uses the inductive rationale through the bibliographic search. Consequently, it characterizes the punitivisim discourse against drugs and the ideologies that support it as a response lacking rationality within the framework of a Social and Democratic Rule of Law, whose implementation in drug-producing countries has caused structural damage to the legitimacy of the democratic systems of these countries, especially with regard to the respect for fundamental rights. This paper offers a study on the War on Drugs and its consequences in the Andean countries (Colombia, Peru and Bolivia). In particular, the way in which the United States internationalized a criminal political discourse that resulted in the establishment of an exceptional criminal prosecution system without a minimum standard when it comes to the constitutional guarantee of due process. In a second moment, this study approaches the different strategies assumed by these countries once the United States abandoned direct military intervention in policies. The paper ends analysing the visible consequences of this process, characterized by the increase in prison overcrowding, the selective criminal prosecution of marginalized groups and mass incarceration are exposed.
Recognition of human dignity and respect for fundamental human rights cannot be restricted to a single category of human beings. The idea that anyone could be considered non-persona, to whom an "Enemy criminal law" may be applied, is incompatible with an ultima ratio liberal notion of criminal law. The humanisation of criminal law is manifested in the growing number of contemporary societies that have abolished or limited the death penalty. Nevertheless, life or long-term imprisonment sentences still prevail, and are on the rise, despite lacking theoretical or philosophical justification in the laws that prescribe them. In this article we will attempt to answer various questions regarding a possible justification for life imprisonment. Different theories will be examined regarding the goals of sentencing in order to determine, on discussing each theory, whether it is possible to justify life imprisonment or other long-term incarceration.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.