Procedural dissociation and impairment of procedural benefits due to late offense modification

Abstract

This article critically analyzed the application of procedural disengagement in the Peruvian criminal process and its impact on the loss of procedural benefits when the legal classification was varied at a late stage. The main objective was to determine whether this practice was compatible with the right of defense, due process, and the legal certainty of the defendant. The research adopted a qualitative approach, with a descriptive-analytical level and a non-experimental design, based on documentary analysis of relevant rulings of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, using hermeneutic and systematic methods. The results showed that jurisprudence consolidated a rights-based model of procedural disengagement, conditioned by factual identity, homogeneity of the protected legal interest, and the existence of effective contradiction. However, a regulatory and jurisprudential gap was also identified regarding the effects of this institution when it was applied after the acceptance of charges or the activation of procedural consensus mechanisms. Finally, it was concluded that late legal reclassification, even without modifying the factual basis, could affect the predictability of the criminal process and the legitimate trust of the defendant, which justified a rights-based interpretation and the need for comprehensive regulatory reform.