Observancia del principio de vinculatoriedad de la Sentencia No. 200-12-JH/21 en el apremio personal dictado en el caso 09333-2022-01182 por incumplimiento del régimen de visitas

Abstract

The strict adherence and direct application of the constitutional standards developed by the Constitutional Court guarantees the order imposed by the constitutional rule of law and materializes the constitutional rule of rights and justice. The present work consists of a legal case study that focuses on describing the observance of the principle of binding nature of Ruling No. 200-12- JH/21 of the Constitutional Court, in the personal constraint dictated in case 09333-2022-01182 for the non-compliance with the child visitation regime. The latter with the aim of determining whether the deprivation of liberty resulting from such restraint could be qualified as illegal, arbitrary, or illegitimate. For this purpose, an analytical-descriptive approach and design was developed, through a bibliographical research focusing on the analysis of the concrete legal reality generated by the enforcement by committal for obstruction of the visitation regime. As a result, it was concluded that the judge of instance in the case study did not correctly apply the specific procedural rules to enforce the obligation to comply with the visitation regime, given the alleged obstruction of such regime, which are contained in Art. 125 of the CNA and ruling No. 200-12-JH/21 of the Constitutional Court. Therefore, it was determined that the ruling did not comply with the principle of binding nature of ruling No. 200-12-JH/21 of the Constitutional Court. In view of this, the study concludes that the deprivation of liberty resulting from the mentioned personal constraint was illegal and arbitrary.