[VIDEO] The Prosecutor terror of the anti-miners is punished by Tomás Gálvez

We begin this interview by making a reminder for the people who in 2025 no longer remember the prosecutor Alejandra Cárdenas who is now intimidated by the acting prosecutor of the nation Tomas Galvez. Do you remember the audio about lentils? That audio where a man in Arequipa, who liked to block roads, said: “Well, now how do we do it? Cash lentils.” Well, that man, Pepe Julio Gutiérrez, is now in jail precisely because of the work of Dr. Alejandra Cárdenas, who from her prosecutor’s office in Arequipa took the case and not only the audio, but also collected much more evidence that allowed Pepe Julio Gutiérrez and his anti-mining leadership to be sentenced, paying a penalty for not only blocking roads, but also exposing the people of Arequipa to danger with the speech that Pepe Julio had Gutiérrez of environmental protection, when in reality what he wanted was to collect at the expense, at that time, of a private company such as Minera Southern.

Dr. Cárdenas, you were assigned to Lima for your work in Arequipa, could you briefly review the most relevant cases in which you have participated in the capital?

In Lima, since my appointment as supreme deputy, a position in which I have 5 years of experience, I have participated in significant cases. The best known was that of Andrés Hurtado and the senior prosecutor Elizabeth Peralta, where I achieved preventive detention, something difficult in the Supreme Court. I have also participated in hearings of the case against Mr. Pedro Castillo and in the appeal of the former president’s prison. My work is objective and I seek to follow the crime, which is the fundamental task of prosecutors.

You mention pressures in the case of Andrés Hurtado. How did these pressures manifest themselves from the prosecution?

Yes, there was a media campaign to discredit my image, where it was said that I coerced Hurtado to be an effective collaborator, which is absolutely false. I have even been investigated by the National Internal Control Authority due to a complaint from Mrs. Emma Benavides, and Mrs. Elizabeth Peralta reported me to the National Board of Justice. These investigations, some archived and others in progress, are based on an alleged extra-procedural approach with Mr. Hurtado, as a result of his statements. Any effective collaboration process must follow a legal channel through the lawyer.

Recently, interim prosecutor Tomás Aladino Gálvez made the decision to remove you and the titular prosecutor Carolina Delgado from the Cuellos Blancos del Puerto case. What was the reason for this decision and how do you evaluate it?

The dismissal resolution argues that Dr. Delgado Manrique provided information and attributed powers to a provincial prosecutor to investigate a supreme authority. However, my responsibility is personal and the resolution does not mention any fault on my part. It surprises me that Dr. Tomás, being knowledgeable about the law, generalizes responsibilities. Delgado signed a letter, which is not an infraction, the Criminal Procedure Code obliges all authorities to report what the prosecutor requests. Furthermore, we were a team of White Collars, and the prosecutor who requested the information was part of this team, with linked cases. The request sought to know if Tomás Aladino Gálvez Villegas was being investigated, and he was informed of the truth. Nothing can be blamed on me, since my work is direct in audiences and requirements, not management. It’s like blaming the worker for what the manager did.

Do you consider that Tomás Gálvez’s decision to remove them is a conflict of interest, given that the information requested referred to a preliminary investigation against him?

Clearly, yes. This is not the first case where the power of the Attorney General’s Office is used to remove uncomfortable prosecutors. Previously, Dr. Bersabeth Revilla was removed from the investigation of the sister of the then national prosecutor, Emma Benavides, and the supreme deputy prosecutor Luis Zapata González. In those cases, lack of productivity was alleged; Now, a foul has been invented. If for Mr. Gálvez it was a fault, he should have reported it to the National Control Authority for a formal investigation. He cannot affirm that jurisdiction was attributed to the provincial prosecutor, since he was only informed of an existing investigation. The “pita” was broken on the side of the person who responds according to duty. The untimely removal, without even a call for attention in my case, suggests an arbitrary act.

Tomás Gálvez has declared that “dolls cannot be created” in relation to the investigation. What do you think of this statement?

The way in which our authorities express themselves is regrettable. The investigation that Mr. Gálvez has dates back to 2022 and was opened by Jesús Fernández Alarcón, and then went through other supreme prosecutors. If it was a “doll”, why didn’t previous prosecutors file it? We had not even carried out any research on that folder, which was in the preliminary stage. It was precisely what Dr. Delgado was going to start doing. The decision to remove us is not based on the progress of the investigation, but on an arbitrary interpretation of a report.

Given the possible reinstatement of Delia Espinoza as Prosecutor of the Nation, what actions should be taken to reverse this situation and restore stability in the prosecutor’s office?

Both Dr. Delgado Manrique and I have requested the reconsideration of this decision, since in my case it is absolutely arbitrary and lacks a legal reason. Gálvez claims that he is returning me to my place of origin, but at the same time he has appointed two supreme deputies from Ica and Callao who have no experience in the position, which is a contradiction. We understand that the reconsideration must be raised before the same authority that issued the act, but given the statements of Dr. Tomás, there would be no impartiality. If Delia Espinoza returns, what we must do is respect the judicial resolutions. The Board of Supreme Prosecutors, as defenders of legality, must facilitate this transition quickly and immediately. We must put aside internal confrontations and get to work on results for citizen security and the fight against corruption, since corruption in senior officials and insecurity are two sides of the same coin.