The elections are approaching and with it the names of the different candidates who will run to be senators and deputies in the Congress. However, the revelation of the names also reveals the past of many applicants, whose profiles, in many cases, are marked by criminal records and complaints.
The profile of these candidates is important, but we must also take into account which parties, instead of filtering their participants, let these alerts pass and allow them a position in their political organizations, making them responsible for bringing questionable characters to Congress and presidency.
The party that so far has the most candidates with criminal convictions is none other than Podemos Perú of José Luna Gálvez, which heads the list with 19 candidates with controversial pasts, according to RPP.
One of them is, for example, José Farro Coronado, candidate for the Chamber of Deputies with number 1 for Áncash. Farro was convicted in 2022 for the crime of usurpation and has a suspended sentence of three years and four months in prison, which appears to have been served according to information declared before the National Elections Jury.
Perú21 not only found said complaint, but also another investigation against him where he would have committed the crime of aggravated collusion after being part of a mega-fraud that directed seven maintenance works on local roads in Yungay, Áncash, taking advantage of the emergency decree that was issued during the COVID-19 pandemic. The amount was S/10,333,275.99.
Regarding this, the specialist in electoral issues, José Naurapi, told Peru21 that we must differentiate between candidates. If a person has a conviction for an intentional crime (whether in the first instance or as res judicata) that is in force, that person cannot apply.
In these cases, if a current ruling is identified, the candidacy should be declared inadmissible. The specialist specified that the JNE interoperability system used to launch an alert about current sentences, which constitutes a direct filter of responsibility.
If the person had a sentence for an intentional crime, but has already served his sentence and has been rehabilitated, the general rule is that there is no legal impediment to applying. This is compatible with the constitutional purpose of punishment, which is rehabilitation.
The expert clarified that the National Elections Jury (JNE) cannot act beyond what is established in the Constitution and the laws. Therefore, the JNE cannot, through regulations, impose more impediments than those already legally established. He even recalled that the Constitutional Court has declared unconstitutional the permanent impediment for serious crimes such as terrorism, in order to respect rehabilitation.
The specialist regretted that these filters have not been proposed by Podemos Perú or by other groups that find themselves in similar situations. Naupari concluded that, given the inability of the JNE to place more impediments, what corresponds is to optimize the principle of transparency, so that citizens can know which candidates were sentenced, even though they have already been rehabilitated.
RECOMMENDED VIDEO
