The leader of Popular Force, Keiko Fujimoriwould have presented false information—or omitted data—about his connection with two companies, according to an inspection report from the Special Electoral Jury (JEE) Lima Center facing the Elections 2026.
The JEE indicated that in Item VIII – Affidavit of Income from Assets and Income; Personal Property of the Declarant and Partnership of Profits – Item Ownership of Shares and Participations, the presidential candidate stated that she had no information to declare.
However, according to report 000007-2026-LHD-JEELIMACENTRO1-EG2026/JNE prepared on February 11, the JEE requested the National Superintendence of Public Records (SUNARP) business information about Fujimori Higuchi.
In that sense, Sunarp warned that the Fujimori leader would register participation in the company SUMMIT PRODUCTS SAC with 3,500 shares and in KYARA9 EIRL (her daughter’s company Kyara Vilanella), in which he appears as owner and manager. It should be noted that the first company was deregistered in 2009.
“Therefore, there would be false information provided for in paragraph 6 of paragraph 23.3 of article 23 of the LOP or the incorporation of false information in the DJHV, according to the regulations for the registration of candidate lists for the 2026 General Elections, approved by Resolution No. 0164-2025-JNE,” says the JEE.
Consequently, in accordance with article 23 of the Political Organization Law (LOP), if the alleged falsity of information is proven, a correction will be made in the candidate’s DJHV, a fine ranging between 1 and 10 UIT will be imposed and the proceedings will be sent to the Public Ministry so that it acts in accordance with its powers.
Likewise, the party’s legal representative was required to present information to clarify the facts.
YOU CAN SEE: Congress will pay S/1.1 million for 10 luxury cars: from sedans to 4×4 pick-up trucks
Popular Force responded
Through a letter, the legal representative of the party requested that a marginal annotation be made in the Affidavit of Resume (DJHV) of Keiko Fujimori on your income received during 2024.
For this reason, it was requested that an extra item related to 3rd category income be recorded for S/45,597. Although the party indicated that Fujimori complied with declaring all the information required by electoral regulations and as approved by the National Election Jury (JNE), they considered it important to present said requirement of the candidate’s income.
Likewise, it was requested to add an annotation about the companies KYARA29 EIRL, related to Keiko Fujimori’s daughter, Kyara Vilanella; and SUMMIT PRODUCTS SAC, a company created in 2001 and which has been deregistered in SUNAT since 2009.
“This request is not made because there has been an omission by our candidate, but rather in accordance with the requirements of the DJHV format (…) it was not necessary to record said information, so it is very respectfully suggested that we take this incident into account to be corrected in the future and, without prejudice to this, include a marginal annotation at the request of part of the aforementioned information,” the document reads.
JEE submitted another report
The JEE also prepared a report on Fujimori Higuchi’s request for marginal annotation. In this regard, the electoral body concluded that the data requested to be incorporated were not timely recorded in the candidate’s DJHV.
In addition, the organization stressed that it was mandatory to present said information at the time.
Likewise, he warned that it was recorded in report 000007-2026-LHDJEELIMACENTRO1-EG2026/JNE that it did not record the business participation of the presidential candidate, “so the subject matter of this request has been previously brought to the attention of the Plenary.”
“In this sense, it is up to the Special Electoral Jury Lima Centro 1 to evaluate what is pertinent within the framework of its powers,” auditor Liliana Herrera concludes the report.
“The incorporation of income and corporate participation not originally declared would not constitute a formal precision, but rather a substantial modification of the asset content of the candidate’s sworn declaration, which exceeds the qualifying assumptions of marginal annotation provided for in article 14 of the DJHV Regulations,” highlights the JEE in another report.
