Early termination and fundamental rights in the Peruvian criminal process: procedural efficiency and constitutional guarantees of the Peruvian State

Abstract

This article addresses the figure of plea bargaining (early termination) in the Peruvian criminal process as a mechanism intended to reduce court congestion and expedite the administration of justice. However, its application raises a dilemma regarding the fundamental rights of the defendant, especially the right to defense, the presumption of innocence, and the principle of legality. The objective of the study, therefore, is to critically analyze the tension between procedural efficiency and the constitutional guarantees that may be affected in this procedure. A qualitative methodology based on documentary analysis was used, drawing on national and comparative case law, as well as relevant doctrinal contributions. The findings show that although plea bargaining can be a useful tool, its legitimacy depends on the defendant’s free and informed consent, the proportionality of the sanction, and adequate judicial oversight. In conclusion, strengthening this mechanism requires balancing procedural speed with the full protection of fundamental rights, in coherence with the constitutional rule of law.