This paper examines the anti-terrorist strategy developed by Peru from the paradigm of the constitutional rule of law. One expression of this counter-insurgency fight was the nearly permanent establishment of states of emergency and the adoption of criminal emergency laws, which are critically analyzed, because they led to serious results on fundamental rights. In that sense, it is shown, with severe concern, the establishment by the Peruvian Government of legal “black holes” and “gray holes” at the expense of victims of enforced disappearance. The author concludes by assessing the position of the courts and the challenge they have in elaborating a democratic and constitutional model for combating terrorism. / El presente trabajo examina, desde el paradigma del Estado constitucional de derecho, la estrategia antiterrorista que desarrolló el Perú. Una de las expresiones de esta lucha antisubversiva fue la instauración casi permanente de los regímenes de excepción y la aprobación de las leyes penales de emergencia, las cuales son analizadas críticamente, pues propiciaron graves afectaciones a los derechos fundamentales. En ese sentido, se muestra, con  grave  preocupación,  la  creación por  parte  del  Estado  peruano  de«agujeros negros» y «agujeros grises» legales en desmedro de las víctimas de desaparición forzada. Finaliza el autor haciendo un balance de la postura de los órganos jurisdiccionales y el reto que tienen en la construcción del modelo democrático y constitucional de lucha contra el terrorismo.

Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2015-10-21T10:34:04Z No. of bitstreams: 1 JONES MARIEL KEHL_.pdf: 967232 bytes, checksum: dac034e48d5761d990e65358e6f01077 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-10-21T10:34:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 JONES MARIEL KEHL_.pdf: 967232 bytes, checksum: dac034e48d5761d990e65358e6f01077 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-04-04 / Nenhuma / Da análise da situação experimentada nos Estados democráticos de Direito após os atentados terroristas de 11 de setembro de 2001, ocorrido nos Estados Unidos, verifica-se a adoção de uma série de medidas legislativas e executivas voltadas à luta contra tal criminalidade. As legislações antiterror normalmente inserem-se no contexto do denominado Direito Penal do inimigo, em que se pretende a exclusão do delinquente da sociedade. Entretanto, é preciso encontrar limites operativos da definição de terrorismo de modo a permitir sua incriminação no marco das sociedades democráticas. Para tanto, por meio de uma abordagem fenomenológica, enquanto revisão crítica dos temas centrais transmitidos pela tradição filosófica através da linguagem, adota-se o método monográfico e, enquanto técnica de pesquisa, a documentação indireta, notadamente pesquisa bibliográfica espanhola e norte-americana, bem como análise de propostas legislativas e de textos legislativos, a fim de verificar a situação brasileira sobre o tema. Com isso, analisando o conteúdo do injusto de tal criminalidade, observa-se o ataque a bens jurídicos concretos protegidos pelos crimes comuns, à paz pública e as vias democráticas de tomada de decisões políticas. Assim, o método terrorista deve ter a intimidação massiva como forma de comissão, com violência reiterada e indiscriminada, a comissão de crimes gravíssimos como modo de execução e caráter armado enquanto meio utilizado. Para lograr êxito no ataque aos bens jurídicos, a conduta terrorista deverá ser executada por uma organização, imbuída de uma finalidade política, no sentido de impor uma determinada regulação à margem dos mecanismos democráticos de tomada de decisão política estabelecidos. A partir disso, o método terrorista serve como limite horizontal para a tipificação da conduta, ao passo que a estrutura organizativa serve como limite vertical e, por fim, o elemento teleológico, como limite transversal. / Analyzing the situation experienced in the law of democratic States after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, occurred in the United States, there is the adoption of a series of legislative and executive measures aimed at combating such crime. The anti-terror laws usually falls within the context of the enemy called Criminal Law, according to which it is intended the exclusion of the offender from society. However, it's necessary find operating limits of the definition of terrorism to allow incrimination in the context of democratic societies. Therefore, through a phenomenological approach, while critical review of the central themes transmitted by philosophical tradition through language, it was adopted the monographic method, while technical research, the indirect documentation, notably Spanish literature and American, and analysis of legislative proposals and legislation in order to verify the Brazilian situation on the topic. Thus, analyzing the content of the unjust in such crime, there was the attack on concrete legal rights protected by common crimes, public peace and democratic process of political decision-making. Thus, the terrorist method must have the massive intimidation as a form of commission, with repeated and indiscriminate violence, the commission very serious crimes as a way of implementation and armed character as a means used. To bring about the attack on the legal interests, the terrorist conduct must be performed by an organization, which must have political purpose, to impose a particular setting the margins of democratic mechanisms established political decision-making. From this, the terrorist method serves as a horizontal limit for its characterization, while the organizational structure serves as a vertical limit and, finally, the teleological element, such as transverse edge.

Canada’s experience in the war against terrorism goes back to the seventies, and continues to develop nowadays, with the last direct terrorist activity in 2017. The Canadian Government reacted to these terrorist attacks by enacting a number of statutes that reflect a changing international paradigm in relation to the fight against terrorism. Fundamental rights and liberties such as the freedom of expression, the right to private life and to personal freedom have been curtailed by these legislative measures. The practical consequences of these measures are analyzed via a comparative examination of the Inter-American System of Human Rights. In general terms, the war against terrorism produces significant impacts over the human rights. / La experiencia de Canadá en la lucha contra el terrorismo se remonta a inicios de la década de los setenta y se desarrolla hasta la época actual (los acontecimientos más recientes han tenido lugar en el año 2017). Las medidas legislativas fueron la vía adoptada por parte de Canadá para contrarrestar los ataques y reflejar el cambio de paradigma político en la esfera internacional con relación al fenómeno del terrorismo. Derechos fundamentales como el derecho a la libre expresión, a la vida privada y a la libertad personal se encuentran particularmente afectados por estas medidas. Un análisis comparativo del sistema canadiense y el sistema interamericano permite identificar las consecuencias de estas medidas. En términos más amplios, la lucha contra el terrorismo genera impactos significativos sobre los derechos humanos en general.

La presente investigación pretende estudiar la criminalización de dos grupos marginalizados en la sociedad chilena de hoy. El movimiento Mapuche y los anarquistas, ambos acusados pos actos terroristas bajo la Ley Antiterrorista, ley promulgada durante la dictadura militar en Chile. La acción social y protesta política de los movimientos populares, sociales y políticos ha resultado en una de las estrategias más efectivas que los pueblos pueden utilizar para luchar contra su pobreza y contra las injusticias en la sociedad. El objetivo de este trabajo es investigar por qué se criminaliza la lucha y la resistencia social que está contra el establecimiento del control estatal en Chile, hoy en tiempos de “democracia” y averiguar de dónde viene la emergencia de un enemigo interno contra el Estado y de ahí también ver las razones subyacentes de por qué se tilda a ese enemigo como una amenaza contra el Estado y la seguridad de la nación. Una de las preguntas de investigación es la siguiente, ¿Es posible decir que el Estado, a través de doctrinas como la Doctrina de Seguridad Nacional y la ley antiterrorista,  mantiene el control y la soberanía del Estado?Basando el estudio, principalmente desde distintos puntos de vista diferentes,  se encuentra que el motivo de esta criminalización es asegurar la mantención de una política económica neoliberal que tiene como objetivo el libre comercio y la privatización del sector público y de la tierra. La respuesta de los sectores sociales, víctimas directas de estos atropellos es la movilización social. La respuesta del sistema, la criminalización de estos. / This research aims to study the criminalization of two marginalized groups in the Chilean society of today. The Mapuche movement and the anarchists, both charged for terrorist acts under the anti-terrorism law, a law enacted during the military dictatorship in Chile.The social action and the political protest carried by popular, social and political movements has resulted in one of the most effective strategies that people can use to fight against their poverty and injustice in the society.The aim of this study is to investigate why this social struggle and resistance against the establishment of state control in Chile is criminalized now in times of "democracy". Further it also aims to find out the underlying reasons for the emergence of an internal enemy against the state and hence also see the underlying reasons for why this enemy is often labeled as a threat against the state and the Security of the Nation.One of the research questions is: Can we say that the state, through doctrines such as the Doctrine of National Security and the anti-terrorism law, maintains control and state sovereignty in Chile?Basing the study from different points of view it’s clear that the reason for this criminalization is to ensure the maintenance of a neoliberal economic policy which aims to strengthen free trade and privatization of the public sector and of the land. The response of the social sectors, who are direct victims of these abuses, is social mobilization. The systems response is the criminalization of these.