Vertigo From Neck Lymphoma

sound mechanisms exist to assess the probative value of testimony

Witnesses are one of the most important sources of evidence that the parties have to prove your case, especially in an adversarial system, which is adopted by our legal [1] . Just follow the trial of ex - President Fujimori, and the equally well-known case of the scandal of the soccer team, to realize how powerful they may be the statements of a person to believe or not certain events occurred in reality.

However, the evidence they still have considerable problems with regard to its probative value. Thus, por ejemplo, en el mismo proceso al ex Presidente Fujimori, se han presentado testigos que se contradicen entre ellos; otros que han cambiado la versión de sus declaraciones; algunos han declarado lo que le han contado otros, pero que ellos mismos no han observado. Ahora bien, teniendo en cuenta la importancia de los testimonios para probar si un hecho ha ocurrido o no, pero, a su vez, los riesgos que tiene este tipo de medios probatorios, la pregunta que surge es ¿cuál debe ser el análisis que debe seguir el Juez para determinar la admisibilidad y el valor probatorio de los testimonios?

Para algunos, el problema se resuelve dejando sin valor probatorio a los testimonios contradictorios, o, en todo caso, restando su valor casi to a minimum. For others, the problem is solved by allowing the judge to assess the evidence with "test of conscience." His conscience will determine which witnesses to believe and which to reject, but I do not see that is special about the conscience of a judge to confide in him and only him, the determination of whether a witness is credible or not.
From my point of view, if there is no rational mechanism to assess the credibility of a witness, this form of evidence should not be allowed in the process. One of the requirements for a decision to be fair, is it is proved that the alleged acts occurred in reality, through rational and intersubjective means that allow the parties, and society in general, check whether the facts stated proven, in fact, have that quality. Luckily

The testimony is not an irrational means of proof. Indeed, the doctrine has been discussing the issues that must be taken into account in determining whether a witness can be accepted and valued as evidence (competence, honesty, objectivity, etc..), Techniques that enable them to assess these aspects and mechanisms that would establish the probative value would be given to the testimony (the Bayesian theorem and Bacon).

In this short commentary, I refer, broadly speaking, the aspects to be evaluated by the court when determining whether a witness can serve or not, as proof. Not discuss the techniques that enable them to assess aspects such as the direct and cross-examination, polygraph, psychological assessments, among others. Nor will discuss the models that were designed to determine the probative value that is assigned to the testimony.

In this sense, among the issues that have been identified to determine if the testimony of a person can be accepted and valued as evidence include the following: (i) the competence of the witness, and (ii) the credibility of testimony.

The first issue is whether the witness has perceived and understood facts contained in his statement. Therefore, hearsay witnesses would not be valid witnesses, because they have not witnessed the events reported. Such witnesses are stating the facts that others have told, but may be no way to assess the competence and credibility of that person. Similarly, if the witness has no ability to understand the facts stated, there can be a valid witness, which is usually the case of children.

The second aspect concerns the credibility of testimony. To do this, will assess the honesty, objectivity and sensory abilities of the witness. The first point is intended to determine whether the witness has been convicted of lying or conceal the truth. The second point, it is referred to whether the witness has any interest or bias that can affect the perception of the facts stated in his testimony. For example, a racist person would be influenced by their prejudices at the time to perceive the behavior of another person for the arrest of four youths in Larcomar illustrate this point [2] . The third point, it is referred to determine how good is the sensory capacity of the witness on the facts as stated perception. Some people, without glasses, can not distinguish the face from one person to three meters. However, there may be others whose senses above functions average and observe details that most people can not.

Other aspects are taken into account when assessing the credibility of a witness, are referred to whether there was other independent evidence pointing in one direction, documents, etc. However, these aspects are more referrals to the probative value on the whole of the evidence taken in the process the credibility of testimony.

As can be seen, if there are certain attributes and elements that must be evaluated by the judge before evaluating a witness, which must be expressed in its statement at the time of founding because it accepts or rejects a particular witness. Therefore, the judges should be required to analyze a testimony to the criterion of consciousness, but consciousness. The judge is obliged to rationally justify why they accept a particular test, and nothing else. This is the only way citizens can determine whether the decision was issued in accordance with law.

For those interested in these issues, here are some resources on this subject:
Schuman, David and Jon Morris. Asssesing the human competence and Credibility of Evidence source of intelligence: Contributions from law and probability. 6 Law, Probability & Risk, March / December, 2007.
Schuman, David. The evidential foundations of probabilistic Reasoning. New York, Willey, 1994.
YOUNGER, Irving. The art of cross-examination. American Bar Association. No. 1.
MAUET, Thomas A. Trials. Strategy, skills, and the new Powers of Persuation. Aspen Publisher, 2005.
WALTON, Douglas. Witness Testimony Evidence. Argumentation, artificial intelligence, and law. Cambridge, 2008.

[1] connection, you can review the following decisions of the Constitutional Court where it takes this position: Judgement relapse 402-2006-PHC/TC File No. (if Luis Enrique Rojas Alvarez), sentence passed in Exp 3390-2005-PHC/TC (if Margarita Toledo), judgment on 005-2006-PHC/TC File No. (if Umberger Manuel Sandoval) sentence passed on the Record 1939-2004-HC/TC (Ricardo Gomez Casafranca case). Also the following judgments: 1296-2007 and RN RN N ° 224-2005.

[2] regard, see the following links:
http://www.elcomercio.com.pe/edicionimpresa/Html/2008-06-19/malditos-larcomar.html
http:/ / www.peru21.com/comunidad/Columnistas/html/BruceIndex.html

Free Electric Cock Milking

for adequate nutrition of the potato crop

For proper nutrition of the potato crop is therefore important to consider the environmental factor associated with the characteristics of these soils taking into account the plant genetic material and the production estimate for either fresh market or industry.
Requirements or dietary needs of the crop per hectare vary according to genetic material, but can be seen that potato with an average population density of 22,000 plants and an estimated production of 40 tonnes per hectare, required (in Kg / Ha) : 170 nitrogen, 80 P2O5, 310 K2O, 60 CaO, 50 MgO, 20 sulfur, zinc 0.8 and 2 of boron.
Within a potato nutrition program is very important to consider the roles of different nutrients in each crop physiological stages.
nitrogen:

is necessary for the growth of stems, branches, leaves and veins. This element begins to be required at the same time you start sprouting or formation of the first sheet and continues to be needed in large quantities to the stage of physiological maturity (drying of branches and stems), approximately 25 days before harvest. Ideal split into two stages: planting and dressing.
The potato crop response to nitrogen fertilization decreases when deficiencies of potassium, sulfur, phosphorus, magnesium or zinc and also at low temperatures and low solar radiation.
MATCH:

in potato cultivation requires virtually from the time of planting, as it immediately starts the germination process and training of the first root from the seed, where the nutrient is vital. The demand for phosphorus in the crop extends to the flowering stage, reaching almost up to 100 days depending on variety. Since then the plant consumes very small amounts of this nutrient. It is recommended to apply in two stages: planting between 60 to 70% and over the side dressing.
fertilizers high in phosphorus, suitable for planting fertilization should be applied always very near the seed because of the low mobility of this nutrient in the soil. POTASSIUM
:

is essential in the transport of nutrients processed from the leaves to other plant organs including tubers, hence the potato thickens report directly to their action. Promotes greater plant resistance to pests and diseases and is a regulator of plant water, so that the damaging effect of frost, drought or floods is less for the crop.
withdrawals that are becoming important at the beginning of the flowering stage, about 50 days after germination of the crop. These high potassium withdrawals remain at these levels until physiological maturity stage, about 25 to 30 days before harvest. The second fertilization is an appropriate time to implement most of this nutrient, but many farmers in Colombia manage a single fertilization that are at the time of planting, citing possible water shortages at the time of side dressing that may lead to not achieving a good solution of fertilizer applied at this time.
addition to these three major nutrients needed to keep a proper balance in soil with other bases primarily as calcium, magnesium, sulfur and trace elements that contribute to good thicken and tuber quality.

Cappaccino With Moka Pot

WHOLESALE PRICES TO THE MARKETS REFENRENCIALES


MARKET PRICES MOYORISTAS


Celery Root and tub
130,000 SACO 50 Kg tub Yam Root and 3,200 kilograms 1 kg tub
Estate and white cocoyam Kilograms 1 Kg 3,700
Pope Estate and yellow tub 1 Kg 3,900 Kilograms
Pope Estate and white tub 1 Kg 4,300 Kilograms
Yuca Root and SACO 65 Kg tub
90,000

Avocado Fruit 1 Kg Kilograms Criola 12000.00 12000.00 12000.00 12000.00
Avocado Fruit 1 Kg Kilograms graft 6000.00 6000.00 6000.00 6000.00
Cambur apple fruit 1 Kilograms 1200.00 1200.00 1200.00 1200.00 Kg Fruit Desiccated Coconut
SACO 35 Kg 35,000, 00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00
Peach Fruit BASKET 30 Kg 115,000.00 3833.33 3833.33 3833.33
Fruits 1 Kg Strawberry 10000.00 10000.00 Kilograms 10000.00 10000.00 Kilograms
Graviola Fruit 1 1900.00 1900.00 1900.00 1900.00 Kg Guava Fruit BASKET
30 Kg 1600.00 1600.00 48000.00 1600.00 Kilograms
Fruits 1 Kg Papaya pulp 2200.00 2200.00 2200.00 2200.00
Limon Creole Fruit 36000.00 1200.00 30 Kg BAG 1200.00 1200.00
graft Limon Fruit BASKET 30 Kg 1266.67 1266.67 1266.67 38000.00
Tangerine Fruit BASKET 30 Kg 2666.67 2666.67 2666.67 80000.00
Creole Mango Fruit BASKET 30 Kg 1333.33 1333.33 1333.33 40000.00
Red Apple Fruit BOX 19 Kg 110,000.00 5789.47 5789.47 5789.47 Green Apple Fruit
BOX 19 Kg 120,000.00 6315.79 6315.79 6315.79
Melon Fruit 1 Kg Kilograms 2600.00 2600.00 2600.00 2600.00 Kilograms 1
Mora Fruit 8000.00 8000.00 8000.00 8000.00 Kg Fruit Orange Juice
SACO 40 Kg
38000.00 950.00 950.00 950.00 35 Kg Fruits Parchita 110,000.00 SACO 3142.86 3142.86 3142.86 Watermelon Fruit
Kilograms 1 Kg 1600.00 1600.00 1600.00 1600.00
Pear Fruit BOX 19 Kg 135,000.00 7105.26 7105.26 7105.26
English Pineapple Fruit SACO 1400 1400.00 56000.00 40 Kg , 00 Kilograms 1400.00
Banana Fruits 1 Kg 2200.00 2200.00 2200.00 2200.00 Kilograms Topocho
Fruits 1 Kg 800.00 800.00 800.00 800.00
Grape Fruit Creole BOX 5 Kg 35,000, 00 7000.00 7000.00 7000.00 important red grape fruit
10 Kg BOX 28000.00 28000.00 28000.00 280000.00
Chard Vegetables

PACKAGE 8000.00 1600.00 1600.00 5 Kg 1600.00 Kilograms
Vegetables 1 Kg fresh Aji 8000.00 8000.00 8000.00 8000.00
Vegetables 1 Kg Kilograms spicy Aji 10,000.00 10,000 00 10000.00 10000.00 Kilograms
Garlic Vegetables 14000.00 14000.00 14000.00 1 14000.00 Kg
leek vegetables PACKAGE 3600.00 18000.00 3600.00 5 Kg
3600.00 PACKAGE 2 Kg Basil Vegetables 3000.00 6000.00 3000.00 3000.00
Vegetables Celery Spain PACKAGE 5 Kg 9000.00 1800.00 1800.00 1800.00
BAG 60 Kg vegetables Auyama 1083.33 1083.33 1083.33 65000.00
Vegetables Eggplant BAG 30 Kg 26000.00 866.67 866.67 866.67
Watercress Vegetables PACKAGE 2 Kg 4000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00
Vegetables Broccoli Huacal 10 Kg 2300.00 2300.00 2300.00 23000.00
Courgette Vegetables BASKET 20 Kg 1400.00 1400.00 28000.00 Vegetables
1400.00 kilograms white onion 1 Kg 4000.00 4000.00 4000.00 4000.00
Vegetables Red Onion 1 Kg Kilograms 4.600,00 4.600,00 4.600,00 4.600,00
Chives Vegetable PACA 30 Kg 75000.00 2500.00 2500.00 2500.00 Kilograms
Chayote Vegetable 1 Kg 1500.00 1500.00 1500.00 1500.00
Vegetables Cilantro PACKAGE 2 14000.00 7000.00 7000.00 7000.00 Kg
Cauliflower Vegetables Huacal 8 20.000,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 2.500,00 kg
Vegetables Spinach KG 1 Kg 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00
BAG 40 Kg vegetables Jojot 40000.00 1000.00 1000.00 1000.00 Lettuce Vegetables
americ Huacal 10 24000.00 2400.00 2400.00 2400 Kg , 00
Vegetables Cos Huacal 10 Kg 2500.00 2500.00 2500.00 25000.00
Vegetables Cucumber BASKET 22 Kg 1454.55 1454.55 1454.55 32000.00
Vegetables Parsley 5 Kg 6000.00 PACKAGE 1.200 00 1200.00 1200.00
Vegetables Peppers BASKET 12 Kg 5833.33 5833.33 5833.33 70000.00
BAG 50 Kg Beetroot Vegetables 80000.00 1600.00 1600.00 1600.00
Cabbage Vegetables 36,000 60 Kg BAG , 00 600.00 600.00 600.00
plum tomatoes Vegetables BASKET 22 Kg 110,000.00 5000.00 5000.00 5000.00 Kilograms
Creole Vegetables Beans 1 Kg 1600.00 1600.00 1600.00 1600.00
BAG 50 Kg Carrot Vegetables 100,000.00 2000.00 2000.00 2000.00

Congralution On Marriage

Hermes Courier Case: Can a committee to punish a company for refusing to conduct an inspection visit?

case Hermes Courier [1]
Can a Commission to penalize a company for refusing to carry out an inspection visit?

By Resolution No. 1906-2007/TDC-INDECOPI (hereinafter the Resolution) of 2 October 2007, the Board of Competition (hereinafter the Board) declared null and void Resolution No. 025-2007/CCD-INDECOPI, which sanctioned Hermes Courier SAC (hereinafter, Hermes Courier) to hinder the exercise of the functions of the Commission, by not allowing officials to enter their local Indecopi. This decision is important because it decides on a more invasive measures has Indecopi on the rights of the citizens, namely, inspection visits.

The central argument of the Chamber is located in section 26 of the Resolution, which literally reads:

26. While the refusal to allow entry of officials in local INDECOPI Hermes Courier implied in fact an interference with the work of the Commission, for the conduct to be classified as delinquent, it was necessary to develop a violent or by threat, situation that no evidence in this case because the person who only manifested verbally that he was not authorized to allow entry of INDECOPI officials, as recorded in the minutes prepared by the latter.

(emphasis added)

From my point of view, the Board's argument is partially correct, since Article 5 of Legislative Decree No. 807 only sanctions the interference with the work of the Commission when it was developed by a violent or threatening. Do not punish the mere refusal of the individual to leave enter your local authority.

However, do not share the position of the Board regarding the refusal is, in fact, an interference with the work of the Commission. On the contrary, such a refusal would find constitutional support the right to inviolability of domicile, as recognized in Article 2.9 of the Constitution, which nobody can enter the domicile of a person or make investigations or records without authorization from the person who lives or without a warrant, except flagrante delicto or very serious danger of their commission. Exceptions for reasons of health or serious risk are governed by law.

In that sense, if Indecopi officials wanted to enter the premises of Hermes Courier needed to approve the company or judicial authorization that would allow them entry, which could be implemented with support from the police. If the authority does not have any of these authorizations, you can not enter the premises of the undertaking concerned and, even less, punished for exercising a constitutional right.

If the company refused to let enter Indecopi officials, the only way they could enter was getting a warrant. Thus, the judge is responsible for assessing whether there are sufficient factual and legal evidence to justify conducting a due diligence inspection on the premises of the company investigated or reported, as appropriate.

The reason for this guarantee is to prevent the arbitrary exercise by instructors bodies entering the premises of the governed, without any major factual and legal on the commission of a breach by the investigation. To avoid this risk, the Constitution has established who is a judge who determines whether there is any minimum the possible commission of a breach by the administrator whose home is to inspect [2] .

foregoing does not necessarily mean that instructors Indecopi bodies can not make their research and instruction can initiate cases [3] . Efficacy and garantismo not have to be opposing concepts. The effectiveness in the work of Indecopi can go hand in hand with the protection of the rights of individuals.

In that sense, to prevent the Indecopi is limited in his instructive work is necessary for the institution starts to develop greater coordination with other public institutions that can provide information on the functioning of the market, devote more resources to teachers agencies and, above all, develop a more fluid relationship with the judiciary, which let your requests be treated with the quickness and speed desired.

Certainly the changes described above require political will and strong leadership to guide institutional efforts in this direction. Otherwise, the only responsible for the ineffectiveness of the work Indecopi instructor will not be the management - who were only exercising their constitutional rights, "but the institution itself.


[1] Persons wishing to read the resolution, I can send an email to forward it effects.

[2] should be noted that the minimum requirements shall have the authority to perform a due diligence inspection have already been defined by the Constitutional Court in the case Eiger. In this regard, see HIGA, Caesar. Case Eiger. First steps in the delimitation of the administrative authority's performance in administrative penalties. In: http://nuestrasrazones.blogspot.com/

[3] The Board seems to share a similar view. Thus, in paragraph 28 of Resolution, the Board expressly states that:

28. This does not imply that the Commission is limited in exercising the functions entrusted to it according to law On the contrary, the Legislative Decree No. 807 has provided mechanisms of action to allow staff to develop the measures INDECOPI inspection. In fact, Article 2 of the said rule, said that to enter the premises, the Commission may seek the support of the security forces and even seek judicial authorization to proceed with the forcible unlocking local if they were closed.

Costco Leather Bracelets

Tacit collusion: is banned in Peru? Eiger case

Tacit collusion:

"is banned in Peru?

few years ago, they faced two football teams "X" and "Y". They only needed a draw to qualify. There was a third team, "Z" to await the outcome of this match to see if classified. If one team lost, he is classified. Started the game and attacking any other. Played in the midfield and in the final moments of the match, throwing "intentionally" the ball to the sides or far, and it takes a while to pick it up. They knew that a draw was enough, and that risk, the better throwing the ball or let time pass. Obviously, the team "Z" complained that the attitude of these teams went against the spirit of the game. It was not necessary that both teams have expressly agreed not to compete, but the attitude of both teams reflected a tacit agreement not to harm the other. If you were FIFA penalize teams "X" and "Y". [1]

I brought this example, as an introduction one of the most controversial issues in the doctrine of Peru, now on the competition: tacit collusion is banned or not? This is an interesting debate and very complex. However, the debate is also at times a bit confusing. Appears to assimilate the plane must be with the plane of being. Thus, the arguments seem designed to sustain tacit collusion should not be prohibited and, hence, jump to assert that tacit collusion is not prohibited by Peruvian law. Clearly, you can not make this inferential leap.

For example, as a doctrine that tacit collusion is conduct rational in an oligopoly, it should not be punished. This would be a valid argument as the legislature was led to tacit collusion not regarded as subject to punishment in our legal system, but is not an argument to tell us whether such conduct is currently prohibited in Peru by Decree Legislative Decree N ° 701.

The argument that interact oligopolies or fixed in the policy of the other companies to set their trade policies, since it is a rational behavior is not an argument that supports that Article 6 of Legislative Decree No. 701 does not prohibit tacit collusion. If two oligopolistic firms without to maintain an express communication, signals are sent to increase the price, or simply to avoid competition between them, such conduct may qualify as a parallel action that restricts, prevents or distorts competition.

To determine whether tacit collusion is prohibited in the Peruvian legal system, the first thing you have to analyze is the text of Article 6 of Legislative Decree No. 701, even more, in the case of provisions on sanctions, where letter of the text is essential. That article is meant by restraint of free competition agreements, decisions, recommendations, parallel actions or practices agreed between companies that produce or could produce the effect of restricting, preventing or distorting competition. The text of this article is broad enough to conclude that tacit collusion is prohibited. Indeed, the phrase "parallel actions" or "concerted practices" paid in this regard. Certainly, it is also necessary that a parallel or concerted practices restrict, prevent or distort competition to be sanctioned.

However, separate issue is whether the sanction of tacit collusion violates principles of sanctions. In that case, one could question the constitutional validity Article 6 at that end, because it violates basic principles of penal law. And, as is known, the argument on the constitutional level becomes more positive and it is only in this scenario that corresponds to carve entering arguments must be " [2] .

As mentioned, some authors argue that tacit collusion is rational behavior of an oligopoly and therefore should not be punished. This argument is vitiated by a kind of naturalistic fallacy. The fact that behavior is rational, not automatically make good, accurate or appropriate. Moreover, in principle, the behaviors that are punished are those that are rational, not those that are not. In my example of the football match, a draw would respond to a rational behavior of the teams "X" and "Y". However, their behavior could be described as good or consistent with the principles of the game?

is a principle of sanctions that only willful misconduct (intentional) can be sanctioned. Negligent conduct may be sanctioned only by exception. In this regard, it is said that an act is rational, an argument that favors its passage, asserting that the act was intentional. Therefore, this argument becomes a boomerang for those who argue that tacit collusion, by being rational, should not be punished.

Now it is true that not only sufficient that the conduct is rational to be punished. It is a first element, but not enough. A second element is whether the conduct caused injury to another person or society [3] . The third element, namely whether it could require companies oligopolistic conduct other than that have been developed. A fourth element is to examine whether the sanction is a mechanism to correct the tacit collusion. It makes no sense to punish someone if the penalty is not the ability to deter or prevent the behavior from recurring in the future. And

These last two points, there are contradictory positions. Some argue that there is no mechanism that can prevent two oligopolistic firms to coordinate their behavior, others argue that if tools exist some means, such as the penalty and the dismantling of enabling practices that if they could avoid the coordination between oligopolistic firms, while recognizing the implementation and monitoring of such measures is quite difficult [4] .

A different argument, but that could shed light on the Prohibition of tacit collusion, is to determine what is the purpose of the legislation free competition in Peru. In principle, the Constitution appears to prohibit only those anticompetivias behaviors that result from intentional and deliberate conduct on the part of companies to eliminate competition. In that sense, arguing that tacit collusion is consistent with our constitutional system have to prove that the conduct is intentional and deliberate behavior by oligopolistic firms to restrict, alter or distort the functioning of competition in the market. The great difficulty would be to demonstrate that both companies intended to align their behavior to restrict, prevent or distort competition.

It can be seen discussion, at the constitutional level, whether tacit collusion is prohibited reflected, ultimately, an evaluative discussion about our economic system, the purpose of competition law and the protection of consumer rights and the limits of State to prohibit and punish certain behaviors.

[1] told The news above should be taken by way of example, and not as fact.

[2] Another way of introducing arguments "should be" the argument would start analyzing the values are included in the economic chapter of the Constitution. Thus, in a second step, would make a reading of Legislative Decree No. 701 in light of the values \u200b\u200benshrined in our Constitution.

[3] The liberal penal law, the principle guiding the sanctioning of conduct is the principle of harm, that is, you can only punish conduct that causes or may cause, damage particular the rights of any individual.

[4] In the case of the party, which may impose penalties and remedies to prevent such conduct happen again. How do you do for two teams to compete? Is the penalty a measure to discourage companies to engage in such activities? It could be the case that the remedy or sanction to impose is worse than the disease.

Spin Bike Service Texas

Eiger Case
First steps in the delimitation of the administrative authority's performance in administrative penalties

Currently, investigation, prosecution and punishment of the breaches in standards as the stock market law, telecommunications, energy, transport, taxation, competition, insolvency, consumer protection, has been delegated to various administrative bodies. Although the delegation of these powers to the Public Administration is justified on pragmatic grounds, we must also consider all risks that can lead the delegation.

Keep in mind that the organs of Public Administration, in principle, have no independence and autonomy that is the prosecutors and the judiciary, at least normatively. Another important aspect is that the Civil Service, by design, should be responsible for implementing the policy of the democratically elected Government. It is the arm of the Government policy .. However, although the Government has the power to carry out the policies for which he was elected, this power is limited to the rights of individuals.

And here comes the second danger which may be the concentration of the investigation, prosecution and punishment of offenses in the Public Administration bodies. Since Public Administration is the implementer of government policies, can achieve these priority over the rights and interests of individuals, and lead to an institutional structure whose procedures do not adequately guarantee the rights of individuals when opens up a procedure sanctions. Sometimes, for example, the same body that is charged with investigating and sanctioning, which implies a direct violation of the adversarial principle governing our legal penalties, according to the extensive jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court [1] .

also because of the close linkage of public administration bodies with the government, it often happens that when a conflict of interest, such as the increase in prices of goods sensitive to the population, the bodies Civil start to conduct research that could affect the rights of persons under investigation.

Indeed, product of research carried out by public administration bodies, they may require extensive information and documentation on individuals, on pain of sanction if they fail to meet them, in other cases, they are required to produce certain information, which can result in significant costs and, in the most burdensome steps can be performed inspections at its premises, which means the cessation of the work of the company during the inspection and the hiring of lawyers who will monitor the legality of performance of public administration. Many of these cases, are made without any evidence of possible commission of an offense.

It is therefore extremely important to the Judgement of August 29, 2006 (case Eiger) [2] , relapse File No. 3075-2006-PA/TC, by which the Constitutional Court, First Hall states a precedent that contains the rule that any measure restricting or limiting a right of individuals must be supported by facts and legal minimum.

This case is particularly relevant as this statement examines the conduct of a due diligence inspection, which is a more invasive measures that can be performed on the Civil Rights individuals. The Constitutional Court noted that to carry out such measures is necessary that the administrator has authority sufficient evidence of the commission of the offense. The mere invocation of legal rules can not serve as an argument to validate the origin of it. This last point is important given that invalidate any action by the Civil Service whose only livelihood is the simple invocation of rules. Thus, it requires government that justifies all acts that could mean a restriction or limitation on the rights of the citizen, otherwise it would be arbitrary.

The reasons for acts of public administration is a guarantee for the citizen as you would know if the reasons given by that authority to support its actions are consistent with the legal system. Otherwise, the individual concerned with the performance of public administration may challenge for violating their rights and seek remedial measures it deems appropriate [3] .

Regarding the standard of proof required to issue a move that may affect the rights of the citizens, the Constitutional Court said only that the evidence must be sufficient to consider that there is a infringement of the rights of the applicant or that the infringement is imminent.

From our point of view, the standard that would require the administrative authority will depend on the type of act in question. The greater the involvement of a right of individuals, the greater must be the foundation of the act of administrative authority. Is not the same information required to quote a given, seize property or conduct an inspection. Each of these acts not only affects individual rights of the citizens, but also has a different level of interference on their legal rights. In this regard, the Courts will establish what the different levels of reasoning to require the administrative authorities concerned according to law.

As noted, currently Public Administration investigate, prosecute and punish a number of infringements, which can affect various rights of the citizens-as property, reputation, freedom of enterprise, due process, among others, why which is necessary to define the scope within which the administration must act. In this scenario, the Eiger case constitutes an important first step in that direction.

[1] In response to the above, would not be unreasonable to think that the design of most sanctioning administrative processes would be unconstitutional.

[2] From the evidence presented in the Constitutional Court, it appears that Microsoft Corporation and others petitioned the Copyright Office of Indecopi inspection at the Private University of Tacna entity located in the town of same name, inspection, however, was suspended on the initiative of the same interest, to alter its original application in respect of another entity located within the same locality. However, subsequently, the Copyright Office, although the scope of the variance request submitted by Microsoft, arbitrarily changed by executing local inspection against Eiger, a resident of Cuba Avenue No. 699, Jesús María, Lima. The Constitutional Court notes that there is no evidence that has supported the taking of inspection by the Copyright Office.
For more information, see the following link that leads directly to the sentence the subject of comment:
http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2006/03075-2006-AA.html


[ 3] In this case, one of the remedies imposed by the Constitutional Court was the annulment of the measure and, consequently, the exclusion of all material evidence collected by the measure of inspection.