He Congress refuses to repeal the Law 32108 on organized crime. This Monday the Board of Spokespersons He refused to include in the agenda of the Plenary Session this Thursday, October 3, the discussion of a proposal to repeal that norm.
The bench of People’s Democratic Bloc (BDP) had presented a bill to repeal it and had asked the spokespersons to exempt it from the commission process so that it could be debated and voted on in the chamber this week.
However, his request only had the support of two parliamentary groups: Together for Peru – Voces del Pueblo and Bancada Socialista.
Sources of The Republic present at the Board of Spokespersons session said that the other groups “voted against, alleging that the press cannot set the agenda for them.”
In the BDP caucus they reported that the spokespersons who refused to exempt from the commission process his proposal was Arturo Alegría (Popular Force)Jorge Marticorena (Alliance for Progress), Elvis Vergara (Popular Action), José Cueto (Honor and Democracy), Héctor Valer (Somos Perú), Guido Bellido (Vamos Perú), Flavio Cruz (Free Peru)Alejandro Muñante (Popular Renewal), José Williams (Avanza País) and Segundo Quiroz (Magisterial Block).
At the closing of this note, this newspaper called on WhatsApp and sought to contact them through their press advisors, but only congressmen Valer and Cruz responded.
“I have opposed its immediate passage to the Plenary without discussion in the Justice Commission. I have proposed that he return, because Law 32108 must be repealed, which violates criminal procedural law and weakens the raid action,” responded the Somos Perú spokesperson.
This newspaper asked him if it was prudent to wait for the Justice Commission to prepare an opinion when the situation in the country requires immediate measures.
“We are going to issue that (the ruling) in a week,” said Valer.
“Because you cannot fall into arbitrariness or improvisation to dictate a good law,” argued Cruz.
His colleague Cueto declared in Los Pasos Perdidos against repealing Law 32108. “It will remain in force. It is being misinterpreted. The only thing that law does is specify when a criminal organization is determined,” he alleged.
Hours before the decision of the Board of Spokesmen, the president of Congress, Eduardo Salhuana (APP), had announced that it was going to propose the discussion of the modification of Law 32108.
“I am going to propose that we discuss the issue of modifying or repealing Law 32108, we must basically correct the issue of raids, which has generated problems, the issue of the defense attorney. We must remember that the raid has always been used as a tool in a surprising way with the purpose of gathering evidence against criminals and here the collective interest has to take precedence,” he stated.
In the end, Fujimori, APP and the other groups closed ranks and opted for the regular path. We must wait for the Justice Commission, chaired by the Perulibrista congressman, Isaac Mita, to prepare an opinion that aims to repeal Law 32108.
While that, in the Congress, Fujimorism and the right propose a law on urban terrorism as a solution to the chaos. The Board of Spokespersons It was agreed that this Thursday the Plenary Session will discuss an opinion from the Justice Commission that goes in that direction. This is how they intend to solve the problem in the Lost Steps two days after the second transport strike.
The spokespersons who opposed including the repeal of Law 32108 on the Plenary agenda
| Spokesman | Parliamentary Group |
| Arturo Alegría | Popular Force |
| Jorge Marticorena | APP |
| Guido Bellido | We can Peru |
| Flavio Cruz | Free Peru |
| Elvis Vergara | Popular Action |
| Jose Cueto | Honor and Democracy |
| Alejandro Muñante | Popular Renewal |
| Hector Valer | We are Peru |
| Second Quiroz | Magisterial Block |
| Joseph Williams | Country Advances |
To answer questions
Earring. On Wednesday, October 2, Ministers Juan Carlos Castro (Environment) and Juan José Santiváñez (Interior) will be questioned in the Plenary Session of Congress. The Board of Spokespersons agreed that the debate would last two hours in the chamber.
