Several congressmen that in 2025 they rejected the intervention of the Inter-American Court in internal affairs of Peru today they applaud the participation of USA in Venezuelaafter the capture of Nicolas Maduroand highlight the role of donald trump. The contrast exposes selective interference in his political discourse.
Over the past year, these legislators have questioned the legitimacy of the inter-American system. They alleged a violation of legal sovereignty. Some proposed the immediate withdrawal of Peru. Others disqualified the Inter-American Court due to alleged ideological biases.
That argument changed in January 2026. After the announcement of the capture of Nicolas Madurospread messages of support for foreign action. They presented the intervention of USA as an act of justice and liberation for Venezuela.
The difference in criteria reopens the debate on political coherence. Sovereignty is invoked when the international pronouncement affects Peru. It is relativized when the intervention occurs outside the country and coincides with ideological affinities.
YOU CAN SEE: José Jerí announces facilities for Venezuelans to return to their country: “Venezuela begins a new era”
Fernando Rospigliosi
In September 2025, Fernando Rospigliosi attacked the Inter-American Court and accused her of lacking jurisdiction to rule on Peruvian laws. He maintained that the international court was acting as an ideological body and demanded the immediate withdrawal of Peru from the inter-American system.
His position was supported by a discourse of sovereignty. He rejected any external intervention in internal decisions of the State and stated that international organizations could not condition national policies or the actions of Congress.
Rospigliosi celebrated the capture of Nicolas Maduro and disqualified those who questioned that fact. In your message did not make reference to US intervention or the role of Donald Trumpnor did he mention the foreign interference that he previously denounced in the case of the Inter-American Courtdespite the fact that the operation was confirmed by the United States.
YOU CAN SEE: Government of José Jerí calls for a peaceful solution in Venezuela after the capture of Maduro by the United States
Alejandro Muñante
In July 2025, Alejandro Muñante questioned the Inter-American Court and requested that the Executive announce Peru’s withdrawal from the inter-American system. He maintained that the court was incurring a gross interference in the legal and political sovereignty of the country and that accepting its rulings meant endorsing this abuse.
The congressman defended that the decisions of the Peruvian State should not be placed under the supervision of supranational bodies. His speech was based on the idea of sovereignty and the rejection of any external intervention in Peru’s internal affairs.
This January 3, Muñante applauded the capture of Nicolas Maduro and stated that the event occurred after “attacks in the heart of Caracas”, confirmed by donald trump. In his message, he described the outcome as an act of justice for Venezuela, without questioning foreign intervention or US participation.despite the fact that he previously rejected that same type of interference in the case of the Inter-American Court.
YOU CAN SEE: Presidents and international leaders speak out after the United States captures Nicolás Maduro
Patricia Chirinos
In August 2025, Patricia Chirinos harshly questioned the Inter-American Court and accused her of intervening in the legal sovereignty of Peru. He maintained that the international organization had an ideological bias and that it protected terrorists under the discourse of human rights.
His statement was aligned with others congressmen that required evaluating Peru’s withdrawal from the inter-American system. The axis of his criticism was the rejection of any external interference in internal decisions of the Peruvian State.
Chirinos spoke out in favor of the capture of Nicolas Maduro and spoke of a “historical possibility” for Venezuela. However, did not make reference to US intervention or the role of Donald Trumpnor did he question the foreign interference that he previously rejected in the case of the Inter-American Court.
YOU CAN SEE: These are the positions of the presidential candidates on the US military intervention in Venezuela
Jose Cueto
In August 2025, José Cueto openly questioned the Inter-American Court and described his pronouncements as an interference in the legal sovereignty of Peru. In an interview with RPP, he stated that the members of the international court had not been elected by Peruvians and that they did not have the authority to decide on the country’s internal affairs.
The congressman maintained that Congress, as an independent power of the State, should not be subject to recommendations from supranational bodies. His speech focused on the defense of institutional autonomy and the rejection of any external supervision over national decisions.
Cueto celebrated the fall of Nicolas Maduro and pointed out that Venezuela began a path towards freedom. However, in his message He avoided commenting on US intervention.although this was confirmed by donald trumpand did not make reference to the foreign interference that he previously questioned in the case of the Inter-American Court.
Jorge Montoya
In August 2025, Jorge Montoya demanded the immediate departure of Peru from the Inter-American Court. He rejected allowing foreign bureaucrats to decide on national justice. His speech prioritized sovereignty and self-government.
The message raised a break with any international protection. He defended the idea that internal affairs should be resolved without external intervention. He reaffirmed a nationalist stance.
Recently, Montoya referred to the capture of Nicolas Maduro with a more institutional tone. He recognized the extraordinary nature of the intervention in Venezuela. He did not reject the action of USA and presented it as a warning to regimes that deviate from the rule of law.
