The mutability of the constitutional court’s evaluative criteria

Abstract

This article analyzes the lack of consistency in the criteria applied by the Constitutional Court when resolving disputes concerning the right to education. Using a doctrinal legal approach, it examines Cases No. 1182-2005-PA/TC and No. 00535-2009-PA/TC. The findings show that, although the same fundamental right was involved in both cases, constitutional review was applied differently without uniform standards. In the first case, greater weight was given to institutional discipline, whereas in the second, stronger protection was afforded to the student’s right to education, despite the fact that the conduct involved was more serious than in the first case.