The former president of the Constitutional Court analyzes the complaint filed by the prosecutor of the nation and sheds light on the paths that Congress should take to process it soon.
What do you think of the constitutional complaint filed by the National Prosecutor and what path will it follow?
The complaint exposes the unfortunate situation of corruption in our country. For the first time in the history of Peru, an acting president is being investigated. In this scenario, the Nation’s prosecutor has collected evidence that supports the complaint for the crimes to which it refers. What she has proposed for debate is to take another step that allows her to accuse President Castillo and determine the criminal responsibility that he may have. The prosecutor is requesting permission to continue with those investigations. This should lead to the suspension of the President of the Republic to be referred to criminal prosecution and thus respond to the crimes collected in the tax investigation. That implies sitting him on the defendant’s bench and allowing the judges to determine criminal responsibility.
What body is called to suspend it?
Congress will have to interpret the scope of article 117 of the Constitution to decide whether to deliver Mr. Castillo to the ordinary judges or to wait until his term ends in 2026 so that he responds in the Judicial Branch.
A sector of constitutionalists proposes to modify or repeal article 117 of the Constitution.
Article 117 has been relaxed so that the acting president is investigated. This has allowed us to know that there would be a criminal organization with corruption issues of the president. Here we consider the discussion if the shielding of the presidential figure can lead to an issue of impunity. It would be illogical and incoherent for a President of the Republic to do a job with moral and unworthy questioning for acts of corruption.
:quality(75)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/elcomercio/QU37X6KYHRBNRPBH3BR7H6B6B4.jpg "Marianella Ledesma: \"Impeachment is the way forward in Congress\"")
Is the vacancy viable?
In the event that Congress agrees with the National Prosecutor, suspends Castillo and hands him over to the judges, if the PJ sanctions him, only Congress could disqualify or remove him. Another path is the vacancy under the argument of moral incapacity that is achieved with 87 votes and another argument is impeachment –because Castillo is violating constitutional mandates– regulated by the Constitution and the regulations of Congress state that 67 votes are needed. I lean towards the latter.
What would these violations be?
I invite you to read the attributions of the Public Ministry expressly indicated in the Constitution: the investigation of the crime. In addition, (article 159.4) says that the PNP is obliged to comply with mandates from the Public Ministry. Therefore, if the president interferes in the work of the Prosecutor’s Office and affects the members of the Police when they do their work, he is simply attacking constitutional mandates that can perfectly be taken up in Congress to analyze his removal from office for constitutional violation. He can also be removed from office for failing to do his anti-corruption duty. This is an implicit command. So, we see several arguments that can be presented in Congress as a constitutional violation.
