The sentence in the Perseus case is a post-mortem condemnation of the thought, figure and ideology of the deceased Shining Path leader Abimael Guzmán. It is the first conviction that considers that “Gonzalo thought” is a very serious crime in itself.
The previous Shining Path sentences only sanctioned specific acts of terrorism: selective murders, explosive attacks, destruction of public and private property, carried out by Guzmán and his followers.
The Fourth National Criminal Appeals Chamber says that it is only doing so now because previously the Public Ministry did not accuse him of sharing Guzmán’s ideas. Although in reality, what there was was a difference between ideas, no matter how extreme, and acts of terrorism, in defense of the universal principle of freedom of thought.
The court does not base the change in jurisprudence at a time when the country is no longer experiencing the violence of terrorism, Guzmán has died and his main followers will continue to die in prison.
The fragile limit of thought, ideas and future reality
The only thing that appears in the 564 pages as an argument for the verdict is that the judges consider it highly probable that the Senderistas will manage to 1) form a political party; 2) register it; 3) participate in elections; 4) win the presidency and, at least, have a majority in Congress; 5) in this way take power and, after obtaining these five points; 6) release all prisoners for terrorism and start killing and exploiting everything, indiscriminately.
In this aspect it becomes a preventive sentence. The argument is valid to support the dissolution of Movadef and the closure and closing of its premises. However, judges use it to support all effective prison sentences, under the premise that it would be likely that people who have been accused, tried and sentenced would reach point six.
Obviously, it is possible for that to happen, hypothetically, but in the current reality it is very difficult. Furthermore, how can we know today, based on what evidence, that any of the people who participated in the trial committed or are preparing to commit these crimes.
Furthermore, it must be taken into account that the first five points are absolutely legal in any liberal democracy. The crime is in point six. Then, that goes against another legal principle, the court sanctions a hypothetical crime that would be committed by an indeterminate group of people. However, the Penal Code pursues the specific individual acts of a specific person.
A freedom that is impossible to achieve, but that the court considers criminal
Then, an aspect that does not have due support is that a sentence is imposed for a desire that today is materially impossible to achieve: the freedom of Abimael Guzmán. As we all know, the messianic Senderista leader died on September 11, 2021 in the Callao Naval Base prison.
Therefore, it is impossible for anyone to release him in the future, but the judges consider that pursuing this goal that is impossible today is a very serious illegal act that would affect society and the democratic state.
While Guzmán lived, neither Movadef nor any other movement was in a position to achieve the freedom of the Shining Path leader. But, the judges consider it an imminent, concrete and achievable danger to this day.
A necessary division, the leadership of Sendero Luminoso and the rest of the individuals
The sentence is divided into two parts. The first is dedicated to the leaders of Sendero Luminoso, among them the late Guzmán, who, the judges say, by not achieving their political objective of coming to power by means of weapons, devised to deceive the people to do it through popular vote.
Indeed, there is abundant proof and confession of this change in objectives of the terrorist organization. However, that does not affect the leaders of Sendero Luminoso who are already serving high sentences and will hardly be released from prison.
The sentences imposed on Elena Iparraguirre, Florindo Flores Hala, Osmán Morote, Margot Liendo, María Pantoja and Victoria Trujillo do not affect their legal status, since they are already serving sentences that keep them in prison for life. To a large extent, neither does that of the lawyers Alfredo Crespo and Carlos Gamero.
The other 27 who were linked to Movadef
That is why we reviewed the sentence, to find the evidence that supports the sentences of 15 and 16 years imposed on the other 27 people convicted, who were not Sendero leaders nor participated in acts of terrorism. There are several who are relatives of prisoners for terrorism and it is logical and understandable that they seek the freedom of their loved ones. That’s legal. What is illegal is that they try to do it in violation of the law.
The little “evidence” that we found refers to the thoughts, ideas, concepts, political strategies of Abimael Guzmán and, from there, acts of participation in the political life of the country that, on the other hand, many of the accused admit. have.
They consider that they are not committing a crime and that they are legally permitted acts: creating a political party, gathering signatures for the legal registration of the group and, at some point, achieving power.
The court recognizes that the Constitution guarantees freedom of thoughts and ideas and that the Penal Code does not sanction them, except when they affect the rights of other people: freedom, integrity, property, etc., although there is no further development of these details.
If it was a question of giving a sentence of social and criminal prevention, these aspects should have deserved greater analysis and evidentiary support.
As written, the sentence creates a dangerous precedent for any political, social and cultural movement that seeks to introduce changes in society, with which logically not everyone will agree.
Without proper legal support, the only thing that is achieved is to provide grounds for the “terruqueo” that right-wing political groups and even the current government have made so fashionable, in the face of the marches for citizen security.
Evidence of probable crime in the distant future
In the absence of evidence, the sentence for these 27 people is based on the following sentences:
“They proposed the “New Grand Strategyâ€� and the “New Red Factionâ€�, to deceive the citizens and make them believe that they had changed.”
“What is being sanctioned is specifically MOVADEF, due to the ideological guide, the principles, the objectives it has: these are basically subversive because they were designed and developed by Abimael Guzmán. It is intended to justify his terrorist acts by participating in the life “politics of the country”
“Consequently, the accused was part of said terrorist organization that had the purpose of coming to power, using the legal mechanisms established by law and tried to make it believe that said movement did not have a subversive nature.”
“With the documents found in the aforementioned property, it is verified that one of the objectives of MOVADEF was the freedom of Abimael Guzmán, but in order to not make this request obvious, a general amnesty and national reconciliation was proposed for “any person prosecuted and convicted of the crime of terrorism”
“In addition, based on the “strategic turn” of the “unarmed struggle”, the objective was to come to power through MOVADEF and pretend that its participation is legal and legitimate, a situation that cannot be admitted.”
“The accused Humala Lema had full knowledge of the MOVADEF Ideology, and voluntarily agreed to be part of said subversive movement and was part of the National Executive Committee, which, as already determined, was a fundamental part of the consolidation of MOVADEF.”
“It is enough to simply read the Ideology, the statutes, principles or programs of said movement that the accused Trujillo Ramos was part of to easily realize that they had subversive content, which was the same thing that the Shining Path defended. It defended the political solution, general amnesty and national reconciliation”
“The aforementioned defendant followed the ideology of the “Gonzalo thought”, which sought to come to power through the MOVADEF and participation in the general elections.”
“The formation of movements that, with the pretext of participating in the political life of the country, can take advantage of the opportunity to form movements or political parties that have
“as an objective to harm national security, that is not allowed in a Constitutional State of Law.”
“The final objective they sought was for the members to assume important public positions, assume control of political power with the purpose of releasing people convicted and prosecuted for the crime of terrorism, especially the maximum leader: Abimael Guzmá n”
