The judicial individualization of the juvenile sanction with special regard to article 24 of Law 20,084: Jurisprudential analysis of the Sixth Criminal and Oral Court of Santiago’s rulings from 2016 to 2020

Abstract

Regarding the discretionary scope in the individualization of juvenile criminal sanctions, I analyzed the reasoning and justifications, which are used as a discretionary tool, but with the obligation to be adjusted to well-founded legal considerations, which appear reasonable and explicit for each specific case, thus avoiding echanical analysis when imposing a sanction, and tending to ensure that judicial justification satisfies the principles of legality, equality in the penal interpretation and progressiveness. The jurisprudential description will be proposed from the ruling practice by the court in convictions between 2016 and 2020; adapting the analysis to the dissimilar reasonings given for the judicial individualization of the sanctions, specifically for imprisonment, and identifying the argumentative exercise deployed, the presence or absence of compliance with the individualization criteria established by the Law, the decision based on the legal limits and its exceptionality. This work’s importance is that the demonstrative exercise of the jurisprudential proposal acquires its force from the repetition, regularity and arguments contained in the rulings, something that is verified regarding the court that practices it, managing to be adopted for diverse reasons, but which is fundamentally related by the influence that its proposals and distinctions may imprint on future sentences.