The criminal lawyer César Nakazaki He spoke on Monday about the case of the Minister of Justice, Juan José Santiváñezwhose voice has been confirmed by fiscal experts such as the one in the audios delivered by Captain PNP Junior Izquierdo to the Prosecutor’s Office.
As remembered, Santiváñez not only rejected his voice, but even refused to participate in the tax expert opinions to verify his version.
However, Fourth Power revealed the “Fonetic-Acoustic Forensic Expert Report No. 259-2025”, prepared by three specialists from the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which confirms that the voice of the controversial recording of the “Chifa” belongs to the strong man of the Government of Dina Boluarte.
Nakazaki pointed out the recording delivered by the left to the Prosecutor’s Office are “Dubited Samples”, which must be compared to “undoubted samples.” However, he said that Santiváñez is not required to attend the expertise, but can be obtained from their participation in public events.
“The interview he gives in the commission or the answers he gives in the commission of the Congress, that is, certain public interventions where his voice can be collected, not invalidated in any way that he has not directly given his voice to make the expertise,” he said on Channel N.
Test element
When asked about whether Santiváñez’s denial of lending his voice before the Prosecutor’s Office complicates his situation, the lawyer said that the behavior of an investigation “is a test element.”
“The behavior in the investigation or in the process (…) is a test element, of charge in this case, which allows strengthening the hypothesis of the Prosecutor’s Office, because it has to be analyzed what the person’s behavior was,” he said.
“Normally when a person refuses to participate in this type of expert opinions, it is because it is his voice. That teaches us the experience in criminal cases,” he added.
Nakazaki indicated that Santiváñez’s behavior can be taken as a non -determining element, “but an element in the chain of evidence that is being built.” In that sense, he pointed out that the expertise generates various scenarios in two planes. In the politician, Nakazaki considered that Santiváñez “is not well stopped because he makes a political defense of his case.” On the fiscal level, “it will depend on each criminal hypothesis that the Prosecutor’s Office is developing.
“The single conversation does not prove a crime. That has to relate to other tests,” he said. In that sense, he used the part of the conversation with left in which it is indicated that President Dina Boluarte would have appointed it to deactivate the diviac.
“There is a problem that must be taken into account. All this ends in Congress, which once filed a constitutional complaint by Patricia Benavides in that regard,” he said.
Receive your Peru21 by email or by WhatsApp. Subscribe to our enriched digital newspaper. Take advantage of discounts here.
