Narváez Mercado, BerónicaTorres Hernández, Ángel AndrésÚrzola Berrio, Héctor Enrique2022-05-262022-05-262020https://repositorio.cecar.edu.co/handle/cecar/2441El objetivo de nuestro trabajo consistió en establecer si los fallos judiciales que sean proferidos por la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz en la búsqueda de una paz duradera y sostenible, prevalecen sobre las decisiones sancionatorias que se hayan proferido en la jurisdicción ordinaria, la jurisdicción administrativa o los fallos disciplinarios, otorgando seguridad jurídica a los victimarios que se acojan a los Acuerdos de Paz y, por supuesto, a las víctimas que padecieron de las graves consecuencias del conflicto armado, para que se garantice el derecho a la verdad, la justicia, la reparación y la garantía de no repetición de los hechos delictivos, con la utilización de un sistema especial de justicia transicional. Teniendo en cuenta que es una investigación teórica y por tratarse de un tema controversial, se realizó un análisis documental de fuentes legales relativas al tema, de la doctrina nacional y extranjera así como de la jurisprudencia de las altas cortes nacionales y de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos; además, se revisó la normativa específica como el Acuerdo Final para la terminación del conflicto y la construcción de una paz estable y duradera, el Acto Legislativo No. 01 de 2017, la ley de amnistía, asimismo, la ley que establece el procedimiento de la JEP.The objective of our work is to establish whether the judicial decisions that are made by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace in the search for a lasting and sustainable peace prevail over the sanctioning decisions that have been issued in the ordinary jurisdiction, administrative jurisdiction or disciplinary decisions, granting legal certainty to the offenders who accept the Peace Accords and of course to the victims who suffered from the serious consequences of the armed conflict, so that the right to truth, justice, reparation and the guarantee of non-repetition of criminal acts, with the use of a special transitional justice system. Taking into account that it is a theoretical investigation and because it is a controversial issue, a documentary analysis of legal sources related to the subject, of national and foreign doctrine and jurisprudence of the national high courts and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights was carried out, In addition, the specific regulations such as the Final Agreement for the termination of the conflict and the construction of a stable and lasting peace, Legislative Act No. 01 of 2017, the amnesty law and the law establishing the JEP procedure were reviewed. As a result, it was found that the judicial provisions of the Special Jurisdiction for peace will have a prevalence over the penal, disciplinary and administrative sanctions that have been issued by the ordinary courts or by whom they may correspond; This is intended through the use of transitional justice that is available as restorative, in order to apply pardon, amnesty or alternative penalties for the actors of the conflict in the search for a lasting and sustainable peace.14 Páginasapplication/pdfotherCapítulo - Parte de Libroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCosa juzgadajusticia transicionalsentenciasprevalenciaJudged thingtransitional justicejudgmentsprevalencehttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2