Prisión Perpetua y Pena de Muerte en Colombia: ¿Reforma o Sustitución Constitucional?

Life Imprisonment and Death Penalty in Colombia: Constitutional Reform or Substitution?

Abstract

Life imprisonment and the death penalty have a dynamic history in Colombia's constitution. Despite being explicitly prohibited by the 1991 Political Constitution, various sectors in the country have attempted to reintroduce them, arguing for their importance in protecting fundamental legal interests. This article analyzes whether the reintroduction of the death penalty and life imprisonment would constitute a constitutional reform or substitution. The pursuit of reimplementing these punitive measures has been the result of different social and political paradigm shifts in Colombian society. The possible reintroduction of these penalties raises the question of whether it would merely modify the Constitution or entail its substitution. This situation reflects a conflict between the national legislature and the High Courts. Through documentary research, examining relevant legal sources and jurisprudence, it is concluded that reintroducing these penalties would violate the fundamental principles of the 1991 Constitution and undermine the pillars of law, due process, and the presumption of innocence—essential elements of a Social and Democratic Rule of Law. Consequently, it would constitute a substitution of the 1991 Constitution. In summary, this article highlights the historical context, examines reintroduction initiatives, and concludes that reintroducing the death penalty and life imprisonment would violate constitutional principles and weaken the foundations of the Rule of Law, thus constituting a substitution of the 1991 Constitution.