The legal figure of the preliminary detentiona tool used for judges to order the temporary arrest of suspects in the commission of crimes with the aim of preventing their escape, has been at the center of public debate in recent days. Its elimination, subsequent attempt at restitution within the criminal law and observations made from Executive on the last day of the deadline; They are processes that have generated criticism for the poor management and impunity they have allowed.
In The Republicwe summoned four professionals from the right and the social sciences so that they can analyze the handling of this figure from the authorities.
YOU CAN SEE: RMP on Minister Santiváñez’s measures to combat insecurity in Trujillo: “It is the same flower as always”
Rubén Vargas Céspedes, former Minister of the Interior: “The elimination of preliminary detention is equivalent to the amputation of the hands of prosecutors and police”
We are facing the largest crime surge in our Republican history. He Government and the Congress They have become part of the problem. Both powers have approved and promulgated a package of laws that directly benefit the criminal organizations. Many defendants, especially in corruption cases, are obtaining their freedom thanks to these laws. The elimination of the preliminary detention It is equivalent to amputating the hands of prosecutors and police.
YOU CAN SEE: The day of Castillo’s coup: “I saw certain characters who are now ministers”
Mega-operations, complex interventions based on intelligence and special procedures, were possible only thanks to the preliminary detention. Without this tool, criminal structures feel empowered. For example, “El Monstruo”, responsible for kidnappings, extortions, murders and drug trafficking in the northern cone of Lima, operates from Bolivia and Brazil. Without the preliminary detentioncould not be stopped.
It is clear that, to protect their allies, they have destroyed a vital tool in the fight against crime. Meanwhile, in the first days of the year, there have been nearly 80 murders, attacks against electrical towers and shopping centers, as well as vehicles public transport attacked with firearms.
Martín Ueda, academic director of the Association for Studies in Social Sciences “Leviathan”: “The central power seeks to influence judicial issues”
In recent decades, the central power has accumulated multiple powers that undermine the institutional barrier of Rule of Law. This is mainly reflected in the way in which, distorting technical or specialized criteria through new interpretations, it seeks to influence judicial, civil and other areas, hindering the minimum procedures necessary for the correct functioning of justice.
YOU CAN SEE: Attack in Trujillo: Víctor Zanabria confirms identity of the intellectual author of the attack on the Public Ministry
There is a constant intention on the part of political actors to safeguard particular interests from their positions of power, whether based on political, ideological agendas or personal problems. This instrumentalization of power reduces political action to individual interests, negatively affecting the judicial processes.
The citizenship perceives that these processes are directed and do not prioritize the national interest. This delays the construction of a country project, especially in a context where democracy, the government and the institutions face historic levels of disapproval.
Juan Jiménez Mayor, former Minister of Justice and former Prime Minister: “With 3% popularity, the government believes it can do anything”
This government does not face the problems that overwhelm Peruvians; acts based on its own interests and those of its allies in the Congress. Proof of this is the approval, in just six months, of the law that limits preliminary detention to cases of flagrancy, supported by 94 votes of Popular Force, Country Advances, Popular Renewalamong others.
He Executive He was not a simple spectator in this process. Despite knowing about the initiative, he did not avoid it or observe it, but rather enacted it. A government committed to confronting crime would have acted to stop a norm that harms the population.
YOU CAN SEE: Martín Vizcarra and Salvador del Solar: Subcommittee approves disqualifying them due to the dissolution of Congress
Furthermore, the government waited until the last moment to observe the new autograph of the Congress after the scandal Law 32181leaving judicial operators without key tools to combat crime. This deliberate decision limits the powers of the Prosecutor’s Office, reserving the preliminary detention only for serious crimes, excluding cases of corruption such as embezzlement, bribery or influence peddling. Who benefits from this? The answer is obvious.
With just one 3% approvalthis government acts without scruples, prioritizing its political survival while crime continues to claim lives. By stating that “they do not govern by polls”, they demonstrate a dangerous indifference towards public opinion, normalizing decisions contrary to the citizen interest.
José Ugaz, former anti-corruption attorney: “They have expressed a desire to cure themselves in impunity”
The Peruvian legislation establishes three ways to deprive a person of liberty: preliminary judicial detention (with or without flagrante delicto), preventive detention and actual prison sentence. The first two are exceptions to the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence and are subject to specific deadlines and requirements: reasonable evidence of the commission of the crime, an applicable sentence of more than 4 or 5 years and the existence of procedural danger (risk of flight or obstruction of the investigation).
The preliminary judicial detention Without flagrante delicto, it is justified to guarantee urgent and essential proceedings that could not be carried out without arresting the person under investigation. Unlike preventive detention, its objective is exclusively to ensure these actions.
YOU CAN SEE: Hildebrandt on Minister Santivañez’s visit to Trujillo after the attack: “It was a pantomime”
In a questionable attitude, Congress used a modification intended to prevent the arrest of police officers in the exercise of their duties to covertly eliminate the preliminary arrest without flagrante delicto.
After the unanimous rejection of public opinion, the Congress he reversed course and reinstated the rule. However, the government of Boluartewhose spokesperson benefited from the repeal, withheld the bill for a month and returned it unenacted. Among the proposed modifications, preliminary detention was restricted to serious crimes with sentences of more than eight years, excluding crimes such as corruption, money laundering, illegal mining, torture and forced disappearance.
With this delay, they have managed to ensure that the return of this tool does not materialize until March. It is evident that his intention is not to recover in health, but in impunity.
