The Government of Dina Boluarte presented a nine-page document in which they propose to Congress that the requirements for the use of preliminary detention in the absence of flagrancy in order to avoid “judicial abuse.” The observations made by the Executive were presented a few hours before the deadline, which has generated criticism by prominent people like the retired colonel, Harvey Colchado.
Through his X account, Colchado did not hesitate to accuse Juan SantiváñezMinister of the Interior, to promote impunity against criminals and extortionistsbecause by questioning the preliminary arrest, he would be leaving the police without support, while weakening the fight against crime.
YOU CAN SEE: The government proposes that preliminary detention only be used for very serious violent crimes
In the statement signed by Colchado himself, he described preliminary detention as “an indispensable and decisive tool for the neutralization of criminal elements.”
He added that the minister’s actions could be seen coming, since his previous decisions showed that he works against the Prosecutor’s Office and the investigating police. “Today, in his ministerial role, he manifests what he knows best: guarantee impunity for those who attack social peace. By questioning such a decisive tool for the pursuers of crime, he not only leaves the police without support, but weakens a of the fundamental bases of the fight against crime,” he wrote.
Observations of the Executive Branch to the preliminary detention law
The Government has indicated that the law’s signature aims to restore one of the criteria that allows a judge, at the request of the prosecutor, to dictate the preliminary detention. However, it warns that the proposed text introduces changes in the terms with respect to the original wording, which could generate problems of interpretation.
According to the official document, the regulations on preliminary judicial detention have presented inconsistencies, oscillating between concepts that do not provide autonomy compared to preventive detention. This could lead to improper uses, such as requesting the measure not to carry out essential procedures for the investigation, but as a means to guarantee that the person under investigation remains detained without a clear justification regarding the relationship between the deprivation of liberty and the investigative actions. Furthermore, it warns about the risk of this measure being used as a pressure tool to obtain confessions or effective collaboration agreements.
YOU CAN SEE: Congressman Susel Paredes resigns from the Primero La Gente political party
The report also notes that the legislative proposal does not critically address the requirements for preliminary detention, nor evaluate whether they are necessary in their entirety, the appropriate time to request them, or the conditions under which they should be applied. In this context, the Government warns that the modification does not introduce a substantial change in the regulation and does not guarantee an adequate application of preliminary detention in cases of absence of flagrante delicto, which could put the fundamental right to freedom at risk.
