Evolution of the right to remain silent in peruvian criminal proceedings: From the inquisition system to constitutional guarantee

Abstract

This article analyzes the evolution of the right to remain silent in Peruvian criminal proceedings, from its origins in the inquisitorial system to its consolidation as a constitutional guarantee in the current accusatory model. In the procedural codes of the 19th and 20th centuries, the silence of the accused was considered an indication of guilt, reflecting an authoritarian view that prioritized confession as the primary means of proof. With the enactment of the 2004 Code of Criminal Procedure, inspired by the accusatory system, the right of the accused not to testify against themselves was expressly recognized, prohibiting any form of coercion or negative interpretation of their silence. Likewise, the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court has strengthened this right, specifying that its exercise does not constitute obstruction nor can it be used as incriminating evidence. Finally, the article identifies persistent challenges to its effective implementation, such as the persistence of an inquisitorial culture among justice officials, the lack of human rights training, and the need for more rigorous judicial oversight over the validity of statements. Overall, the study highlights the importance of the right to remain silent as a pillar of due process and an expression of human dignity in the Peruvian criminal justice system.