Unreasonableness is therefore an essential rule, which has also been referred to as the “principle or guarantee of due process on the merits”. The principle of reason aims to preserve the value of justice in the content of any act of power and even of the individual. It is necessary to develop and analyze the nature of the criminal act in order to properly guide the legal approach proposed in this work. Basically, there were two antagonistic lines in Argentine doctrine, one substantialist and the other procedural. In the latter case, there were also two different variants as to which legislative body should regulate the cases in which prosecution was to be brought. Within the framework of the principle of legality, it acts in conjunction with the principle of the general interest, according to which the private interest must give way to the public or social interest, and with the principle of the separation of powers, according to which the public authority is divided into bodies with specific and limited functions for each of them. On the other hand, Zaffaroni argues, the mere fact that the prosecution and prosecutorial bodies are represented and titled by men with different legal criteria can only be answered to violate the principle of equality before the law. The principle of legality is to guarantee and protect legal certainty. Although it is used throughout the legal system, it is gaining importance in the criminal, administrative and tax fields. This will consist in the elaboration of this project, precisely in the analysis both of the nature of the offence and of the scope of the national constitution, which is responsible for the legislation relating to the beginning of it for the application of the Criminal Code, on the basis of the absence of a specific provision in our Magna Carta, which grants this attribution to the national legislative power for its examination in the Penal Code. and establish the legality of the method either in this summary or in another with generalized claims. Whatever effort is required, it is not plausible, invoking an alleged violation of the principle of equality enshrined in article 16 of the National Constitution, to justify uniform progress in the pursuit of so-called equality which, even during its validity without discussion of procedural legality, in the light of events of a similar duration that have occurred at the national level, rarely found a similar app. [36] Whatever a province`s procedural system, and without prejudice to the recognition of its broad legislative autonomy in this area, the truth is that while legislative symmetry cannot be pushed to the point of requiring full equality for all defendants in this country, inequality cannot extend to the complete abolition of the right to equality before the law.

For one constitutional principle cannot erase or eliminate another from the same hierarchy. (CSJN: Verbitsky, Horacio, 328:1146, 03/05/2005) -VEGA, Dante Marcelo: El principio de oportunidad en el nuevo Código Penal y su validacion constitucional en LAVADO, Diego Jorge y VEGA, Dante Marcelo: Estudios sobre el nuevo Código Procesal Penal de Mendoza (Ley Nº 6.730), Ediciones Jurídicos Cuyo, Mendoza, 2000. This is the system chosen by the National Congress as a general principle; means that criminal proceedings must be instituted in all cases pending before the Authority (Article 71 of the Code of Civil Procedure), with the exception of the exceptions provided for in the same Article, which are governed below, to which the Institute for the Stay of Proceedings was added in 1994 (Article 76 bis, ter and quarter of the Code of Civil Procedure), for many a principle of opportunity. In fact, another eminent jurist from the same province as the previous author, Vélez Mariconde, feeds on the same aspect of thought, as does Jorge Clariá Olmedo, who admits the existence of substantial penal norms with an executive function and therefore criminal procedural validity[9]. Although the author places it in a zone of darkness for criminal acts, it gives it a substantive character[10], although by developing the principle of legality, he recognizes that the control of its exercise is procedural[11]. With the exception of crimes that could be described as constitutional, such as the crime of treason (article 29 of the Criminal Code), the Constitution and the international treaties contained therein (article 75, paragraph 22 of the Criminal Code) merely lay down the conditions for the exercise of the criminal power of the State: no one may be punished without prior judicial proceedings, which has a legal basis before trial.