The **Ley de Conciliación Extrajudicial 2024** in Peru represents a key evolution in alternative dispute resolution. This legislation updates the framework originally established by Law No. 26872, modernizing procedures, embracing digital tools, and reinforcing clarity in the extrajudicial conciliatory process. It aims to provide faster, more accessible means to resolve civil, familial, and commercial disputes without resorting to formal litigation while ensuring legal certainty and efficiency.
Background and Scope of the Law
The Ley de Conciliación (Law No. 26872) historically established a formal mechanism for extrajudicial reconciliation, applicable to matters such as debt obligations, family disputes (child custody, alimony, visitation), indemnities, evictions, and similar issues. The 2024 reforms (notably under Law 31165) introduced significant advances by allowing virtual or electronic hearings, ensuring broader accessibility and administrative efficiency.
Key Principles and Objectives
- Promote access to justice via consensual agreement mechanisms.
- Ensure confidentiality and neutrality in conciliatory proceedings.
- Streamline procedures with clear timing rules and the use of technology.
- Strengthen public trust by formalizing centers and conciliators under Ministry of Justice authorization.
Conciliación Extrajudicial Under the Updated Rules
Definition and Mandatory Nature
The process is a consensual scheme pursued before accredited conciliators or centers, intended to reach binding agreements in eligible disputes. For certain civil claims, such as debt claims or family law matters, attempting extrajudicial conciliation prior to filing a lawsuit is mandatory. Courts may dismiss cases where no prior conciliatory attempt is documented.
Eligible Disputes
The law permits conciliation over disputes involving available rights (derechos disponibles). In family law, this includes issues like alimony, child custody, and visitation rights, emphasizing the best interests of the child.
Technology Integration
The 2024 amendment mandates that conciliations may be conducted in person, electronically, or in hybrid form. Digital tools such as video conferencing and digital signatures are formally recognized. Parties must declare their preferred modality and confirm technological preparedness. Where technology access is limited, in-person participation remains available at government-affiliated sites.
Procedural Timeline and Steps
Initiation and Scheduling
Once a request is submitted, the conciliator is assigned within one business day. Notification to the other party follows. The hearing must occur within approximately 10 working days, respecting minimum notice periods before the session.
Conduct of the Hearing
A single conciliatory session is held, potentially divided into phases if necessary. Proceedings aim to facilitate communication and propose nonbinding settlement options. If a party fails to attend, the conciliator may reschedule within the same time limits.
Outcome Documentation
If parties agree, they sign an official conciliation act either fully resolving the dispute or partially recording what remains unsettled. If no agreement is reached, a certificate of nonagreement is issued, allowing judicial proceedings to continue.
Authorized Conciliation Operators
- Centers accredited by the Ministry of Justice;
- Private conciliators authorized in accordance with professional regulations;
- Public bodies in domains such as family, civil, or labor disputes;
- Notaries and legal clinics associated with universities.
Free and Affordable Access
Certain conciliations particularly those in equity or with lowvalue parties are provided free of charge. Advisory or representative services may also be offered at no cost, with parties only covering procedural expenses.
Benefits and Challenges
Advantages of the 2024 Framework
- Greater access via digital modalities;
- Expedited resolution of disputes;
- Reduction in burden on courts and legal expenses;
- Preservation of consensual decision-making and confidentiality.
Challenges and Criticisms
Some practical issues persist: technological disparities may impede access for rural or low-income populations. Additionally, although deadlines are shorter, improper or late filings can result in missed conciliation windows and procedural rejection by courts.
Comparative and Regional Context
While Peru’s approach stands out for its digital emphasis, similar systems exist across Latin America. Countries such as Colombia also regulate extrajudicial conciliation via authorized centers and recognize its procedural benefits under updated legal frameworks.
Final Observations
The Ley de Conciliación Extrajudicial 2024 (via amendments including Law 31165) marks a significant step toward modernizing Peru’s conflict resolution landscape. By integrating technology, imposing structured timelines, and reinforcing the role of authorized centers, the updated law aims to promote efficiency, fairness, and accessibility. However, successful implementation hinges on awareness, equitable access to digital tools, and strict procedural compliance. For citizens and legal practitioners alike, understanding the nuances of this law is essential to achieving its promise of streamlined, consensual justice.