Application of the Principle of Equality Under Law 30364 in Cases of Violence in the Sociocultural Context of Peru

Abstract

Purpose. This exploratory study examines how the sociocultural context enters the reasoning of Peru’s Supreme Court in decisions related to Law No. 30364 and the principle of equality and non-discrimination.
Methods. Using a qualitative, descriptive-interpretive design, we applied directed content analysis with deductive coding (a five-category codebook plus a cross-cutting equality dimension) to four purposively selected decisions issued between 2021 and 2024: Cassations Nos. 1177-2019 (Cusco), 397-2021 (Amazonas), and 1481-2022 (Selva Central), and Appeal for Annulment No. 12-2023 (Piura). The decisions are deliberately non-equivalent: in Cusco and Selva Central, Law No. 30364 operates as a relevant legal framework; Amazonas is a borderline criminal case centred on Article 15 of the Penal Code; and Piura serves as a temporal contrast (events from 2004).
Results. Cultural circumstances entered judicial reasoning through two mechanisms, both observed only in Amazonas and Piura: the assertion of a custom and its substantiation through specialized (anthropological) expert evidence. Gender stereotypes, identified in Selva Central, operated as a separate factor unrelated to any cultural practice, and in Cusco no cultural argument was raised. Differences between courts were explained by evidentiary assessment, legal classification, and procedural limits (notably the prohibition of reformatio in peius) rather than by territorial origin.
Conclusions. Equality functions as an interpretive framework rather than a criterion applied uniformly across decisions. Given its size, the sample does not support inferences about causality, prevalence, or regional differences; priority should be given to training, expert-evidence standards, linguistic access, and disaggregated judicial data before broader legal reform.