He Constitutional Court (TC) ordered the investigation to be archived by the Cocktails casewho followed the leader of Popular Force, Keiko Fujimoriand 14 other people for the alleged crime of money laundering and criminal organization. According to the decision of 5 judges of the TC, the accusation and investigation into contributions to the 2011 and 2016 presidential campaigns lacked legal basis.
“Declare founded the lawsuit filed by Mrs. Giulliana Loza Avalos in favor of Mrs. Keiko Sofia Fujimori Higuchi. “Declare without effect all the preceding acts of the process followed since the beginning of the preliminary investigations processed in Fiscal File 55-2017,” the TC resolved.
The ruling was supported by the magistrates Dominguez Haro, Morales Saravia, Gutiérrez Ticse, Ochoa Cardich and Hernandez Chavezwho considered that the right to a reasonable time within the justice system and the principle of legality was violated.
YOU CAN SEE: Keiko Fujimori is completely free in the Cocktails case: Law 32130 approved by Congress played in her favor
Keiko Fujimori: arguments of the TC to annul the Cocktails case
In context. In February 2024, the lawyer of the former presidential candidate, Giulliana Lozapresented a habeas corpus to the T.C. to nullify the investigations against his sponsor. At the time, he maintained that before November 2016, receiving money for a political campaign and that the alleged acts were not considered a crime of money laundering in the form of property receipt in the Peru. Likewise, he pointed out that after preventive detention was issued against Fujimori, in October 2018, “new elements were incorporated into the case without respecting the right to defense.”
In that sense, the TC argued its decision to archive the case on two points: 1. According to what they indicate, the crime of money laundering in the form of property receipt was incorporated into the legal system on November 26, 2016 through Law 27765. That is, after the alleged crimes committed by Keiko Fujimori have been carried out.
“In such circumstances, interpreting that there was a crime like the one charged, would presuppose a retroactive and unfavorable application of the criminal law, as well as an evident affectation of the principle of criminal legality,” says the TC.
YOU CAN SEE: Keiko Fujimori is completely free in the Cocktails case: Law 32130 approved by Congress played in her favor
The second point that the TC mentions to support its ruling is that the crime of criminal organization for which Keiko Fujimori“is not at all consistent with a fully legitimate goal such as winning the elections.”
That is, for the TC, the fact that Fujimori Higuchi has started in the electoral elections that he later lost, is not considered an element to think that a criminal organization was set up to launder illicit money in the political campaigns of 2011 and 2016.
“(…) A political goal such as winning elections cannot be equated with a criminal purpose, and it is totally wrong that collecting contributions to finance a campaign represents an illegal act,” said the TC.
On the other hand, the TC highlights that it was struck by the fact that the Public Ministry, in order to prove the alleged money laundering, centralized the entire debate on the alleged “smurfing” of money that some militants had incurred, which cannot be considered a crime either. According to what they indicate, the prohibited financing of political organizations was considered starting in August 2019, some time after the alleged events.
TC on Keiko Fujimori: “The innocence or guilt of the beneficiary is not being declared”
Even though he Constitutional Court indicated that the crimes of money laundering and criminal organization for a political campaign were not considered crimes before November 2016, he also emphasized that “the innocence or guilt is not being declared” of Keiko Fujimori in the investigation that was carried out against him.
In reason 96 of its resolution, the TC mentions that it cannot continue with the tax investigations because it lacks legal basis. “With regard to the criminal process followed against the appellant, the innocence or guilt of the beneficiary is not being declared, but rather the infeasibility of continuing with an accusation lacking legal basis and clearly contrary to what is established in the Constitution is being confirmed,” he highlighted.
Luz Pacheco had a singular vote
The president of the TC, Luz Pachecowarned that “the real intention of the plaintiff is for the Constitutional Court to rule on whether the conduct attributed to the favored party has criminal relevance or not.”
However, Pacheco considered that the TC “is not competent to determine whether a conduct has criminal relevance or not,” but that this is only the jurisdiction of the ordinary judge because “they deal with matters of mere legality.”
“In that sense, the plaintiff has the right to assert his defense arguments, due to the accusation made to the favored party, in the corresponding criminal process,” he highlighted.
