Subjective coincidence in the double jeopardy principle regarding administrative penalty proceedings

Abstract

This article analyzes the subjective coincidence as part of the elements that constitute the double jeopardy principle, applicable to administrative proceedings aimed to impose a penalty regarding anti-trust legislation in Peru. The purpose of establishing it is according to the Law for the Repression of Anti-Trust conducts is approved, as well as the Law for the General Administrative Proceedings, in the imposition of a penalty to a corporation and its representatives, based on the very same facts, exists a subjective coincidence that will make applicable the provisions of the double jeopardy guarantee. The previously mentioned analysis also pretends to determine possible consequences of the described case, where the annulment of the administrative act is one of the possible results to be evaluated in this work.