Aporías de la incapacidad moral permanente. ¿Cabe servirse de la ética para revocar a un presidente?

This paper examines some problems related to the moralization of politics based on the concept of “permanent moral incapacity”, which has been used in Peru to depose three presidents in recent years. This concept is interpreted in two stages: first as an ethical evaluation of a leader’s behavior and second as damage to or lack of a capacity which is constitutive of moral agency. First, three possible moral standards for evaluating the ruler’s acts will be explained. In the second place, with reference to three ethical traditions, three capacities-cognitive, volitional and empathetic-will be analyzed since these might be fundamental to considering a person as morally responsible. Then it will examine some aporias which are generated when the concept of “permanent moral incapacity” is used inappropriately. To solve them a constitutional reform is necessary.