In fact, as he has established Juan Carlos Ruiz Morella, Although the disciplinary sanction was a valid option even though he were " desmentida" , she was obviously untimely, because it did not affect the judicial resolution that it had failed to fulfill and disobeyed the binding precedent of the TC, since that one maintained its effects. That is to say, this way was not most suitable and effective to assure fulfillment of the binding precedents of the TC. Another possibility would have been the presentation of a constitutional process of shelter against the resolution that does not know the binding precedent, alleging, among other things, the violation of the right to the equality, because it is not possible that justice is pronounced of different way – if that it is not opposed before two facts or materially identical situations fundamental and. Another foundation of this possible " shelter against amparo" it would have been the violation of the right to the effective judicial trusteeship, in particular of the right of the actionable one to that the judge pronounces itself on the bottom and in agreement with the right, because the binding precedent, by virtue of article VII the CPC, is source of right and part of the legal ordering which all are put under, magistrates including. Although attractive, this answer had several problems; the main one, the time: a shelter process delays, in the best one of the cases, two years in being transacted, turned which it into a little effective instrument to assure the respect the precedent. On the other hand, a to weigh to have outlined, the importance and the mediatic effects of the binding precedents, in certain Peru sector has questioned the faculties of the Constitutional Court to assume faculties of positive legislator, by virtue of which the principle of separation of powers consecrated in the article would be being been violating 43 of the Political Constitution of the State, invading itself and being affected legislative faculties of the Congress of the Republic prescribed in Article 102 of the norm normarum, especially if this one last one does not give cover to the binding precedents. Without hesitation Daniel Lubetzky explained all about the problem.