LEGITIMACY OF THE COERCIVE MEASURE OF CIVIL DETENTION IN THE EXECUTION OF SENTENCES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

Abstract

Article 53 of the Code of Civil Procedure regulates coercive measures, specifically, numeral 2 of said article empowers the judge to order the detention for 24 hours of anyone who resists his order without justification. This regulation generates controversy as it is considered unconstitutional because it would violate article 2 numeral 24 literal c) of the Political Constitution of the State, in the understanding that there is no imprisonment for debt, even the terminology of detention would correspond to be used in criminal matters. Furthermore, it is questioned whether the civil judge can order detention. In this context, this article analyzes the positions against and in favor of civil detention, concluding that several Latin American countries maintain its application specifically for certain cases, whether in civil or criminal normative bodies, as a sanction for non-compliance with a civil obligation, therefore it is necessary to regulate in the Code of Civil Procedure as an express power of the judge, the civil arrest, to enforce its decisions. Emphasizing that the appropriate terminology is that of arrest for up to 24 hours, which can be dictated by the civil judge.