Preferencias académicas de los estudiantes de la carrera de Derecho y su vinculación con los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS) a través del estudio de sentencias

Abstract

Abstract:This research work deeply analyzes the case 296 - Sentence dated June 24, 2015, Case of Canales Huayapa et al. vs. Peru . The case relates to the alleged violation of the right to judicial guarantees and judicial protection, to the detriment of Carlos Alberto Canales Huayapa, José Castro Ballena and María Gracia Barriga Oré, as consequence of the lack of adequate and effective judicial response to the cessations in quality of permanent officials of the congress of Peru vs. Peru. According to Commission, Dismissed from Congress vs. Peru, the Court determines that it occurred in the context of a regulatory framework that prevented the alleged victims from being clear about the path to which they had to go to challenge their transfers, also indicates that the facts of the case constitute the reflection of a context of legal uncertainty and consequent defenselessness judiciary against possible arbitrary acts of public power in the framework of collective layoffs that occurred at the time.