The lawyer for the President of the Republic announced that he will appeal the decision of the Power of attorney to reject the protection of rights to annul the investigation initiated by the Nation’s prosecutor in charge, Paul Sanchez against the president for allegedly having headed a criminal network that became entrenched in the Ministry of Transport and Communicationss to distribute public works and positions.
In dialogue with this newspaper, Benji Espinoza, who defends peter castle in the case, considered the measure approved by the Supreme Judge Juan Carlos Checkley of the Supreme Court of Preparatory Investigation is “incorrect” and announced that it will file an appeal within three business days, a time that begins to run from Monday due to the holiday for the Farmers’ Day.
“If we talk about a criminal investigation, the criminal procedure code must be interpreted from the Constitution, not the other way around. That is why we will appeal the decision within the corresponding period, probably on Tuesday at the end of the day we will present the appeal before a second instance “indicated to Peru21.
THEY GIVE AGAINST CASTLE
This afternoon, the Supreme Court of Preparatory Investigation declared unfounded the protection of rights presented by Castillo Terrones for alleged violation of the constitutional principles of procedural legality and the principle of legal certainty. Through his lawyer, the head of state had requested that the fiscal provision that ordered the expansion of the preliminary investigation against him be annulled for the alleged crimes of criminal organization, aggravated influence peddling and aggravated collusion.
LOOK: Judge orders that fiscal investigation against Pedro Castillo continue
The Nation’s prosecutor in charge, Pablo Sánchez, had decided to expand the investigation that had been initially suspended against Castillo Terrones and indicated that the proceedings be carried out. The measure was adopted after receiving information from the prosecutor’s offices that investigate alleged money laundering and that have collected testimonies involving the president, such as the one provided by the pre-trial businessman Zamir Villaverde.
On Twitter, Espinoza questioned Checkley’s decision. “Important point: f. 13.11. The President -according to the judge- can only be the subject of a preliminary investigation, but not subject to the formalization of an investigation, much less an accusation. That is to say, he rules out that preventive detention may be required against him, ”he wrote..
