Presunción de inocencia y estándares de prueba: análisis dogmático del Acuerdo Plenario No.02-2005/CJ-116, Perú
| Pages | 58-83 |
| Date | 01 January 2026 |
| Published date | 01 January 2026 |
| Author | Camila Jasmin Diestra-Jaramillo,Itzel Giomar Julca-Nivin,Lola Aurora Solórzano-Vidal,Yul Alexander Neire-Robles |
| Subject Matter | Criminal Law |
Iustitia Socialis. Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas
Año XI. Vol. XI. N° 20. Enero – Junio. 2026
Hecho el depósito de Ley: FA2016000064
ISSN: 2542-3371
FUNDACIÓN KOINONIA (F.K). Santa Ana de Coro, Venezuela
Camila Jasmin Diestra-Jaramillo; Itzel Giomar Julca-Nivin; Lola Aurora Solórzano-Vidal; Yul Alexander Neire-Robles
58
https://doi.org/10.35381/racji.v11i20.4951
Presunción de inocencia y estándares de prueba: análisis dogmático del Acuerdo
Plenario No.02-2005/CJ-116, Perú
Presumption of innocence and standards of proof: dogmatic analysis of Plenary
Agreement No.02-2005/CJ-116, Peru
Camila Jasmin Diestra-Jaramillo
cdiestraj@unasam.edu.pe
Universidad Nacional Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, Huaraz, Áncash
Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0308-8146
Itzel Giomar Julca-Nivin
itzel.julca@pucp.edu.pe
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Lima
Perú
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-3583-2309
Lola Aurora Solórzano-Vidal
lsolorzanov@unasam.edu.pe
Universidad Nacional Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, Huaraz, Áncash
Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8795-3343
Yul Alexander Neire-Robles
yneirer@unasam.edu.pe
Universidad Nacional Santiago Antúnez de Mayolo, Huaraz, Áncash
Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0428-4050
Recepción: 18 de agosto 2025
Revisado: 19 de octubre 2025
Aprobación: 15 de diciembre 2025
Publicación: 01 de enero 2026
Iustitia Socialis. Revista Arbitrada de Ciencias Jurídicas
Año XI. Vol. XI. N° 20. Enero – Junio. 2026
Hecho el depósito de Ley: FA2016000064
ISSN: 2542-3371
FUNDACIÓN KOINONIA (F.K). Santa Ana de Coro, Venezuela
Camila Jasmin Diestra-Jaramillo; Itzel Giomar Julca-Nivin; Lola Aurora Solórzano-Vidal; Yul Alexander Neire-Robles
59
RESUMEN
El artículo aborda la problemática del desplazamiento del estándar probatorio en delitos
sexuales a partir de la aplicación del Acuerdo Plenario No. 02-2005/CJ-116, con atención
a la centralidad otorgada al testimonio del agraviado y a la corroboración mínima o
periférica. El propósito fue analizar la compatibilidad de dicho estándar jurisprudencial
con el principio de presunción de inocencia y con las exigencias de valoración probatoria
previstas en el artículo 158 del Código Procesal Penal. La investigación adoptó una
metodología cualitativa de enfoque dogmático-jurídico, sustentada en el análisis
normativo, doctrinal y jurisprudencial. Los resultados evidencian un uso sustitutivo de la
corroboración periférica respecto del umbral , tensiones con la motivación racional y la
valoración conjunta de la prueba. Se concluye que la vigencia de las garantías del
proceso penal exigió una reformulación dogmática del estándar probatorio conforme al
modelo acusatorio y al bloque de constitucionalidad.
Descriptores: Presunción de inocencia; estándares de prueba; procedimiento judicial;
derechos humanos; Estado de derecho. (Tesauro UNESCO).
ABSTRACT
The article addresses the problem of the displacement of the evidentiary standard in
sexual crimes from the application of Plenary Agreement 02-2005/CJ-116, with attention
to the centrality given to the testimony of the injured party and to the minimum or
peripheral corroboration. The purpose was to analyze the compatibility of this
jurisprudential standard with the principle of presumption of innocence and with the
evidentiary evaluation requirements provided for in Article 158 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The research adopted a qualitative methodology of a dogmatic -legal
approach, based on normative, doctrinal and jurisprudential analysis. The results show a
substitute use of peripheral corroboration with respect to the threshold, tensions with
rational motivation and the joint assessment of the evidence. It is concluded that the
validity of the guarantees of criminal proceedings required a dogmatic reformulation of the
evidentiary standard in accordance with the accusatory model and the block of
constitutionality.
Descriptors: Presumption of innocence; standards of proof; judicial procedure; human
rights; rule of law. (UNESCO Thesaurus).
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
