From Recognition to Enforceability: Constitutionalizing the Right to Mental Health in Peru Through Constitutional Court Jurisprudence

Vargas-Murillo A.R.; Supo Hallasi R.F.; Cueva Quispe C.A.; Pari-Bedoya I.N.M.A.; Fernández Argandoña R.A.J.; Pajuelo Beltrán C.A. · Laws (2026) · DOI: 10.3390/laws15040084

Resumen

This article examines how the right to mental health has been constitutionalized in Peru through the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. Using doctrinal constitutional analysis, the article combines the interpretation of international human rights standards, domestic legislation, and the Court’s leading cases with a targeted review of recent scholarship on community mental health reform, disability rights, and coercion. It argues that the Peruvian Court has transformed mental health from a predominantly medical or welfare concern into a constitutionally enforceable right by recognizing its connection to dignity, psychological integrity, equality, and the right to health. The article further argues, however, that this constitutionalization remains incomplete: the Court has been stronger in recognition and remedial activation than in fully confronting coercion, legal capacity, and the structural determinants of unequal enjoyment. The Peruvian case therefore illustrates both the promise and the limits of judicially driven rights-based mental health reform. Its broader contribution lies in showing that constitutionalization should be assessed not only by rights recognition, but also by doctrinal elaboration, institutional remedies, and the extent to which courts reshape the underlying legal model of care.

Instituciones: Universidad Privada de Tacna; Universidad Privada del Norte