VIRTUAL HEARINGS, FAIRNESS AND IMMEDIACY IN THE PERUVIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
In the global context, where virtuality transversalizes the areas of knowledge, it is essential to approach and trace the processes of adaptation, where the study of the implications within the legal system is considered critical. The objective of the study was to analyze the impact of virtual hearings on the principles of fairness and immediacy in civil and criminal courts in Peru, 2024. The approach was based on the socio-legal paradigm. The research assumed a non-experimental, analytical and mixed design, comprising a sample of 147 legal operators of civil and criminal courts; the survey technique was applied. The results showed that virtual hearings presented limitations that compromise the principles of fairness and immediacy, especially in restrictions related to the interpretation of non-verbal communication and emerging technical difficulties that affect both the interaction between the parties and the ability of judges to make accurate assessments of the credibility of witnesses. It is concluded that the transition to virtual hearings in Peru requires a comprehensive reform of the judicial system to preserve fairness, immediacy and access to justice in the digital environment.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Responsibility of the authors:
The authors are responsible for the ideas and data collected in the manuscripts. They are additionally accountable for the fidelity of the information, the correction of the citations, the right to publish any material included in the text, and the presentation of the manuscript in the format required by the Journal (WORD template). A manuscript forwarded to CHAKIÑAN must not have been published before, nor must it have been submitted to another means of publication.
Copyright:
Published articles do not necessarily compromise the viewpoint of the CHAKIÑAN JOURNAL. The Journal is aligned to the policy of the licence de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-No comercial 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC 4.0). Each author retains the right to the paper published in the Chakiñan journal.
Privacy statement
The personal data and email addresses entered in this magazine will be used exclusively for the purposes stated by the publication and will not be available for any other purpose or person.
How to Cite
Share
References
Abrams, Z. (2022). Can justice be served online? Monitor on Psychology, 53(6), 70. https://n9.cl/ew0vr2
Bandes, S. A., & Feigenson, N. (2020). Virtual trials: Necessity, invention, and the evolution of the courtroom. Buffalo Law Review, 68(5), 1275-1352. https://n9.cl/wu5bn
Cecconello, W., & Stein, L. (2020). Prevenindo injustiças: como a psicologia do testemunho pode ajudar a compreender e prevenir o falso reconhecimento de suspeitos. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 38(1), 172-188. https://doi.org/10.12804/revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.6471
Chronowski, N., Szentgáli-Tóth, B., & Bor, B. (2024). Resilience of the judicial system in the post-Covid period: The constitutionality of virtual court hearings in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 64(3), 413-434. https://doi.org/10.1556/2052.2023.00468
Constitución Política del Perú [Const]. Art. 139, inciso 3 de 29 de diciembre de 1993 (Perú).
Decreto Legislativo N.° 1470 [con fuerza de ley]. 26 de abril de 2020.
Denault, V., & Patterson, M. L. (2021). Justice and nonverbal communication in a post-pandemic world: An evidence-based commentary and cautionary statement for lawyers and judges. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 45(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-020-00339-x
Dutton, C. (2021). The Judicial Responses to COVID-19 in Africa: Mapping & analysing the accessibility of justice and the use of technology in court systems during the 2020 global pandemic. British Journal of Criminology, 63(3), 588-607. https://n9.cl/xughv
Engstrom, D., & Gelbach, J. (2021). Legal Tech, Civil Procedure, and the Future of Adversarialism. U. Pa. L. Rev., (169), 1001. https://n9.cl/ap7tj
Filip, K., & Albrecht, K. (2023). Virtual Justice: Measuring Perceptions of Fairness in Civil and Criminal Courts. Law e Commons, 54(4), 1067-2023. https://n9.cl/2l8p0
Fucci, L. (2024). The legacy of Luhmann’s sociology of law: A trialogue among social theory, jurisprudence and empirical research. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 14(5), 1359-1383. https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1923
Guamán Chacha, K. A., Hernández Ramos, E. L., Yuqui Villacrés, C. S., & Lloay Sánchez S. I. (2021). La investigación jurídica: objeto, paradigma, método, alcance y tipos. Revista Conrado, 17(S2), 169-178. file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/jlleon,+Gestor_a+de+la+revista,+A-22.pdf
González, D. (2016). Manual práctico del juicio oral, 4 ed. Tirant Lo Blanch.
Hernández, R., Fernández, C., & Baptista, P. (2014). Metodología de la Investigación. McGraw-Hill Editores. https://n9.cl/xmw1m
ICRC. (2021). Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado Democrático de Derecho (FJEDD). https://n9.cl/n7vu3l
Leach, A. M., Woolridge, L. R., Cutler, B. L., Neuschatz, J. S., & Jenkins, B. D. (2021). COVID-19 and the courtroom: how social and cognitive psychological processes might affect trials during a pandemic. Psychology, Crime & Law, 28(8), 731-762. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2021.1962867
Limaylla, A. J. (2021). Las audiencias virtuales en los procesos penales durante el estado de emergencia nacional. Ius Vocatio, 4(4), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.35292/iusVocatio.v4i4.545
Luna, F. (2021). Fiabilidad de la prueba testimonial: breve análisis desde la psicología del testimonio y los errores de la memoria. Prolegómenos, 24(48), 53-67. https://doi.org/10.18359/prole.5701
MAXQDA. (2019). MAXQDA-Software de análisis de datos cualitativos. https://n9.cl/ff8gj
México Evalúa. (4 de marzo de 2024). Las audiencias judiciales virtuales en México después de la pandemia. https://n9.cl/x9kv9a
Micheletti, P. A. (2023). La comunicación no verbal (CNV) como elemento de valoración de la prueba testimonial en el Sistema Acusatorio Adversarial. Revista Pensamiento Penal, (480), 1-13. https://n9.cl/y2fvo
Morrow, R.; Rodríguez, A. & King, N. (2015). Colaizzi's descriptive phenomenological method. Psychologist, 28(8), 643‐644. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/26984/1/Morrow_et_al.pdf
Mulcahy, L., Rowden, E., & Teeder, W. (2021). Exploring the case for virtual jury trials during the COVID-19 crisis. An evaluation of a pilot study conducted by JUSTICE. Oxford Bookes University. https://n9.cl/nwimjf
Ochatoma, F. C., Choquehuanca, J. D., Humpiri, F. M., & Mamani, E. E. (2023). Digitalización de las audiencias públicas penales en Perú durante la pandemia: ¿vulneración al principio de inmediación? Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 15(2), 738-746. https://n9.cl/qn7bn
OEA. (1969). Convención Americana sobre Derechos Humanos (Pacto de San José). https://n9.cl/780p
ONU. (1966). Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. https://n9.cl/9s6ph
Ramos, F. (2023). Legal technology: A comprehensive analysis of their impact on legal industry and enhancing entrepreneurial opportunities. Derecho global. Estudios sobre Derecho y Justicia, 9(25), 367-385. https://doi.org/10.32870/dgedj.v9i25.701
Romo-Santana, J., & Mora-Poveda, D. (2023). El negocio del Legal tech. Una revisión bibliográfica. Revista Investigación y Desarrollo I+D, 17, 35-49. https://doi.org/10.31243/id.v17.2023.2041
Rossner, M., & Tait, D. (2020). Presence and participation in a virtual court: Designing for the 'remote subject'. Journal of Law and Society, 47(1), 156-175. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211017372
Rossner, M., & Tait, D. (2023). Presence and participation in a virtual court. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 23(1), 135-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958211017372
Salinas Ávila, J. N. (2022). Audiencias virtuales en los procesos laborales y su vigencia en la postpandemia COVID-19. Ius Vocatio, 5(5), 15-30. https://doi.org/10.35292/iusVocatio.v5i5.597
Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2021). Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and Research. London: University of Strathclyde Glasgow.
Susskind, R. (2019). Online courts and the future of justice. Oxford University Press.
Tran, D. (2023). Is witness credibility on virtual courtroom procedures impaired or enhanced for adults or children? Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 32(2), 491-512. https://n9.cl/1v4xh
Tribunal Constitucional Peruano. (10 de abril de 2012b). Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional STC Exp. N° 0033-2010-PI/TC. https://n9.cl/zlpko
Tribunal Constitucional Peruano. (24 de octubre de 2012a). Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional STC Exp. N° 6135-2006-PA/TC. https://n9.cl/z64kx
Tribunal Constitucional Peruano. (9 de junio de 2011). Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional STC Exp. N° 00849-2011-PHC/TC. https://n9.cl/er31v
Van der Sloot, B., & Van Schendel, S. (2021). Procedural law for the data-driven society. Information & Communications Technology Law, 30(3), 304-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2021.1876331
Viña, C. M. (2019). La disrupción en la enseñanza de Ciencias Sociales. Una mirada fenomenológica. Innova Scientific SAC, 1(1), 6-21. https://n9.cl/z5mji
Yanez-Yanez, K. A., & Mila-Maldonado, F. L. (2023). La oralidad como principio constitucional de los procesos. Kairós, 6(11), 33-51. https://doi.org/10.37135/kai.03.11.02