Since the dawn of the new presidential term, the ombudsman, Walter Gutiérrez, has been a headache for the Executive. One that appeared in every questionable decision made by President Pedro Castillo. Through press releases and pronouncements in the media, the defender criticized the provisions of the head of state, which in his opinion were not the best for the country.
Even Walter Albán, who presided over the Ombudsman at the beginning of the millennium, told this newsroom that Gutiérrez was in the line of being an opponent “for quite some time.” Today the defender, whose mandate has expired, has announced that he will only stay until March this year and he has assured in RPP that during his administration he has acted “within the constitutional framework.”
His replacement now depends on a Congress dominated by the opposition, which in recent months has had little will to choose his successor. Gutiérrez, in many cases, agreed with what was stated by the opponents. His permanence, somehow, played in his favor.
Official parliamentarians such as Margot Palacios and Guido Bellido, from Peru Libre, or allies such as Sigrid Bazán and Isabel Cortez, from Together for Peru, have already urged the Legislature to elect the new head of the Ombudsman’s Office.
YOU CAN SEE: Lescano criticizes project to lie down effective collaboration: “It favors thieves”
In fact, in August 2021, Cortez presented a motion for a commission to be formed to propose the new defender to the Plenary, since Gutiérrez had to have left the position in September of that year upon completing his five-year constitutional term. The request, however, met with resistance: it did not materialize.
Gutiérrez Camacho then continued in his post and during these months he has been a staunch critic of some of the president’s decisions, especially when the head of state appointed questionable ministers.
The questions began
For example, when the president announced his first cabinet, led by Guido Bellido, the defender sent you a letter asking you to make changes to certain portfolios. Some questioned ministers of that team were Iber Maraví, Iván Merino, Juan Silva and Bellido himself.
Days later, and in the face of controversy over the cabinet at the time, Gutiérrez proposed a bill to expand the requirements to be a minister. He assured that the initiative sought the “suitability and guarantee of human rights in the ministers of State.”
YOU CAN SEE: Amuruz asks Landa to be summoned for Castillo’s evasive answers about the Governments of Cuba and Venezuela
As the days passed, the pronouncements increased. In November, the Ombudsman published a series of tweets in which He asked the head of state for explanations for his unofficial meetings at Breña’s house. And, in December, the autonomous entity indicated that Castillo’s management did not guarantee the work of the press in Peru, since it was being carried out in a “hostile environment.”
defender too criticized that the nation’s prosecutor, Zoraida Ávalos, has opened and immediately suspended the investigations against the Peruvian dignitary, and pointed out that the law that establishes that any constitutional reform must first be approved by Congress before being submitted to a referendum does not seem unconstitutional. The Executive had opposed this norm.
Gutiérrez also maintained, on Canal N, that “it would be a very serious mistake to remove the attorney general (State General) Daniel Soria,” who denounced the president. Finally, the Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Aníbal Torres, removed him from his post.
Defender criticized Castillo on CNN
Perhaps the highest point in the relationship between the defender and the Executive was when the former gave an interview to the international media outlet CNN. There he asked President Castillo to resign.
YOU CAN SEE: Will the motions and complaints against Alva affect the truce between Congress and the Executive?
“The president has not shown signs of loyalty to his collaborators. The president has not shown signs of respecting minimum standards of integrity to choose his ministers. He has not shown respect for democratic values either, and has had both conduct and missions that are being identified as acts of corruption. I would invite him to resign.” express.
Request changes in Torres cabinet
The last request made by the defender to the Government is that the cabinet reconforms, now chaired by Aníbal Torres. Gutiérrez questioned the presence of the head of Health, Hernán Condori, investigated in the Prosecutor’s Office for allegedly having committed corruption crimes, and rejected the lack of equality in the team of ministers, since there are only three women.
“Unfortunately, in recent months and repeatedly, the appointments of ministers have transgressed the minimum standards of suitability and the constitutional framework,” reads the letter that Gutiérrez sent to Pedro Castillo.
From the Executive there has recently been a response. “The Ombudsman’s Office has to work in the service of the country, look at all the social conflicts and recommend aspects. I do not believe that the Ombudsman is an entity that can give an opinion on the political situation. For that there are other private entities that could do it”, declared the Minister of Culture, Alejandro Salas.
YOU CAN SEE: Pedro Castillo evades question about contradictions before the Prosecutor’s Office: “This press is a joke”
Peru Libre wants Gutiérrez out
In Congress, the Free Peru caucus has announced that it will promote the violation of defender Walter Gutiérrez, following article 161 of the Constitution. To achieve this, they will need two thirds of the legal number of congressmen (87 votes).
The parliamentary group assures that the Ombudsman “has not fulfilled the position with the suitability that the people demand; he has turned a deaf ear to the abuses committed by the factual powers of the country against the people; he continues to openly support political positions violating the neutrality that the position demands; and constantly attacks the President of the Republic, contributing to political instability.”
“The actions of this bad official have not only generated political unrest, but also set a bad precedent, for which he should deserve a constitutional accusation, disqualification and disqualification from public office,” the perulibristas concluded.
