The Formulation of a Normative Standard of Judicial Impartiality that Incorporates ObjectiveCognitive Impartiality in Peruvian Legal System: A Study on the Repercussion of the Jurisprudence of International Human Rights Courts

This article is a case study on the configuration of the duty of impartiality in the jurisprudential development of human rights courts and its influence on Peruvian domestic courts. In this line of reasoning, the way in which the distinction between subjective and objective impartiality —identified...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Higa Silva, César, Sotomayor Trelles, José Enrique, Cavani, Renzo
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:Perú
Institución:Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Repositorio:Revistas - Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/26947
Acceso en línea:http://revistas.pucp.edu.pe/index.php/derechopucp/article/view/26947
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Duty of Judicial Impartiality
Jurisprudence of International Human Rights Courts
Subjective Judicial Impartiality
Objective Judicial Impartiality
Cognitive Biases
Deber de Imparcialidad
Jurisprudencia de Tribunales Internacionales de Derechos Humanos
Imparcialidad Subjetiva
Imparcialidad Objetiva
Sesgos Cognitivos
Descripción
Sumario:This article is a case study on the configuration of the duty of impartiality in the jurisprudential development of human rights courts and its influence on Peruvian domestic courts. In this line of reasoning, the way in which the distinction between subjective and objective impartiality —identified with the “theory of appearances”—has been constructed is analyzed and, later, the relationship between impartiality and cognitive bias is determined. This is done with the aim of criticizing the theory of appearances and proposing the formulation of a standard in which three dimensions of the guarantee of impartiality are distinguished: subjective, objective-functional and objective-cognitive. Finally, the distinction between external and internal judicial independence is addressed, and its difference with impartiality is determined.