Many countries in Latin America have turned towards socialist governments. These processes have been accompanied by constitutional reforms in many cases, especially those related to the Castro-Chavista movement. This paper discusses two generally accepted ideas: i) That there is something like a «Bolivarian constitution» or «Castro-Chavista constitution»; and, ii) that a new constitution is necessary to establish a Castro-Chavista government. On the contrary, we maintain that talking about a «Castro-Chavista constitution» is an oxymoron. There is no constitution when what is sought is precisely the destruction of the rule of law. Precisely because of the above, a constitutional reform is not necessary to achieve this objective, but only if seen from a superficial and instrumental perspective. The essay is based on the study of the Peruvian case, which delves into current news to the point of risking its academic or «scientific» value, but as a necessary resource to understand the constitutional/political process experienced in Peru, beyond the theory.