Summary The work analyses the constitutionality of Article 94a of the Criminal Code (CC) in the light of the grounds given during the processing of Law 21.160 to justify the removal of limitation periods from a catalogue of sexual offences involving minors. For the purposes of the analysis, the work presents the current conceptions of the institution of limitation in criminal law and proposes to adopt the theory developed by Martin Asholt in Germany, according to which limitation is the result of an objective process of loss of criminal significance of unfairness. The work also critically describes the central reason behind the introduction of Article 94a CC: the idea that the victim would have a right to the non-prescription of criminal proceedings on the ground that sexual interaction with a child often leads to serious and long-lasting biopsychological conditions that prevent him from reporting the fact until his or her biosyllachic recovery, which, in general, could only happen very far beyond his adult age and with therapeutic help.