On Tuesday night, just one day after the frustrated interview with President Pedro Castillothe legislator Hector Ventura (Popular Force) distributed to the members of the Control Commission, in digital format and with watermarks, the final report of the investigation on the meetings in the Sarratea passage, in the district of Breña.
The document consists of 363 pages and in the final part they conclude that the president would have incurred in constitutional infraction in the Saratea cases Y the alleged interference with the superintendent of Sunatwhich can give rise to a political trial for the eventual sanction of dismissal.
Sarratea and Sunat cases
There are five cases addressed in the final report, to which this newsroom had access. One of the most developed has to do with clandestine meetings of the presidentat the beginning of his mandate, in Sarratea.
The report concludes that Castillo transgressed his functions by not keeping a record of visits. Here they include the congressmen Alex Walls Y Lucinda Vasquezfor non-compliance with the transparency law.
The report conclusively concludes that Castillo had meetings to commit acts of corruption, although later, in the same paragraph, they add that these facts are the subject of a fiscal investigation.
Here is the paragraph in reference: “It has been confirmed by this supervisory commission that President José Pedro Castillo (…) has held meetings outside the legal domicile of the Presidential Office (…) with former Ministers of State, congressmen of the Republic, officials and businessmen, with the purpose of jointly planning acts of corruption in the public administration, in the context of a criminal organization; criminal acts that, to date, have been the subject of fiscal investigation.”
For this reason, they raise a constitutional accusation against Castillo, for alleged violation of four paragraphs of article 118 of the Magna Carta.
These paragraphs specify that the president must comply with and enforce the laws, direct government policy, ensure internal order and regulate the laws without transgressing or distorting them.
According to the report written by the team of advisers to the Fujimorist Hector Venturathese would have been breached by the president.
The Control Commission recommends denouncing, additionally, President Pedro Castillo and former ministers Juan Silva (Transportation) Y Juan Carrasco (Inside) for alleged criminal organization and other crimes.
Here they no longer include any congressman, although in the conclusions they do determine that there were meetings with members of the Legislature to plan acts of corruption.
The second case that concludes that there were constitutional infractions is the one linked to the alleged interference in Sunat.
The document concludes that the former secretary Bruno Pachecowith the consent of the president, exerted pressure on the superintendent of Sunat, Luis Vera Castilloto favor the companies Grupo Deltron SA and MQVC Corporation SAC.
Something similar would have occurred to favor the citizen Marco Urbina Chumpitassi, applicant for the position of auctioneer in the Sunat de La Libertad.
Here the report also concludes that Castillo incurred constitutional violations for the same articles of the Sarratea case. In addition, they consider that he committed an offense against article 172, despite the fact that this rule only addresses issues of the Police and the Armed Forces. AA., and nothing related to the Sunat.
In the opinion of constitutionalist Omar Cairoonly in these two cases (Sarratea and Sunat) could the report have any implications, in terms of a political trial process, “which can conclude with a sanction of suspension, disqualification or dismissal” of President Castillo.
In the other three cases, according to Omar Cairothere was only loss of time by the commission, because the president can only be prosecuted for crimes contemplated in article 117 of the Constitution.
Benji Espinoza, Castillo’s attorney, disqualified the report by emphasizing that they already had it ready. “The report of the Congressional Oversight Commission does not have legal rigor, it is political and its criminal analysis is wrong and light,” he said.
In the final report they also propose denouncing Castillo for four alleged crimes: criminal organization, incompatible negotiation, influence peddling and collusion.
These crimes, according to the document, would have been committed in the cases Tarata III Bridge, promotions in the FF. AA. and the Sarratea meetings.
At this point they also file a complaint against the former ministers John Silva (Transportation), John Carrasco (inside) and Walter Ayala (Defending).
In the Puente Tarata III case, the Oversight Commission avoided delving into the accusations against the congressmen of Popular Action, designated as ‘The Children’.
For this reason, they only recommend sending the records to the Prosecutor’s Office to continue with the investigations already opened against congressmen Raúl Doroteo, Elvis Vergara, Juan Mori Celis, Jorge Flores Ancachi, darwin espinoza and Ilich Lopez.
The final report now opens a new stage in the repeated attempt by Congress to remove Castillo from the Palace.
The route to the impeachment process
The Oversight Commission meets today at 3 pm in an extraordinary session to debate and vote on the report against Pedro Castillo. The document would then go to the plenary session of Parliament.
As explained by the constitutionalist María Antonieta Gonzales, after approval in plenary, the document is only sent to the Prosecutor’s Office.
But in relation to the presumed constitutional infractions, the next step would be for the president of the Oversight Commission, Héctor Ventura, to endorse the report and send it as a complaint to the Subcommittee on Constitutional Accusations.
Thus, in the next legislature, the aforementioned subcommittee can initiate a process of impeachment to reach the eventual sanction of dismissal of the president.