The National Board of Justice (JNJ) opened a preliminary investigation against the Delia Espinoza for alleged functional misconduct. According to resolution No. 647-2025-JNJ, the magistrate had failed to comply with an order issued last June that required the immediate reinstatement of the prosecutor Azucena Solari Escobedo. The replacement, however, took place only two months later.
The disciplinary body considers that this delay could constitute a very serious offense in accordance with the Fiscal Career Lawby showing resistance to a firm administrative mandate. The case once again puts Espinoza under the microscope and accentuates the friction between the Prosecutor’s Office and the JNJwho for months have maintained a relationship marked by disciplinary measures and judicial processes.
The document, signed by the president of the JNJ, Gino Ríos, entrusts the conduct of the procedure and imposes a period of ten business days for Espinoza to present his defenses and evidence. If corroborated, the case could lead to a formal investigation that would even allow sanctions ranging from suspension to dismissal.
YOU CAN SEE: Tomás Gálvez orders the removal of official vehicles from Delia Espinoza
Delia Espinoza would have delayed the replacement of prosecutor Azucena Solari
The complaint was filed by the citizen Luis Miguel Caya Salazar pointing out that Delia Espinoza committed functional misconduct by not promptly complying with the order to reinstate the prosecutor Azucena Solariissued by the JNJ in June of this year. According to the file, the replacement was completed only on August 12, which would constitute an unjustified delay.
The document details that Espinoza, in his capacity as supreme prosecutor and prosecutor of the Nationhad the obligation to execute the resolution without delay. The Disciplinary Procedures Directorate of the JNJ prepared the respective file and sent it for evaluation to the investigating member.
The facts attributed to the magistrate could fall within paragraphs 6 and 13 of article 47 of the Fiscal Career Lawreferring to non-compliance with mandates and obstruction of administrative decisions.
Defense of Delia Espinoza points out institutional strategy of the JNJ to avoid her reinstatement to the Prosecutor’s Office
From the environment of Delia Espinozait is argued that this new research is part of a institutional strategy of the JNJ to keep disciplinary pressure open. Luciano López, defense of the suspended National Prosecutor, considers that the case lacks legal basis and that it would be used as an “alternative flank” against the judicial process that is currently reviewing the suspension imposed months ago.
“Legally, the case of the doctor’s accusation is not a case that can be sustained. So, strategically, rather than looking at it legally, what gives me the impression is that they are trying to open another accusation for this issue, because in reality the judge at any time not only has to sentence, but has to rule on compliance with the precautionary measure,” he mentioned.
The defense interprets this measure as a preventive reaction to the possibility that the Judiciary ruled in favor of Espinoza in the previous file. In this scenario, opening a new investigation would serve—according to this reading—as support to prolong control over her management and prevent the magistrate from fully resuming her duties without question.
YOU CAN SEE: JNJ investigates the head of Reniec, Carmen Velarde, after exposing data from the electoral registry
PJ admitted the JNJ’s appeal, but maintains the reinstatement of Delia Espinoza
He Judiciary declared the appeal filed by the National Board of Justice (JNJ) against the decision that lifted the suspension of Delia Espinoza as supreme prosecutor. However, he specified that the appeal has no suspensive effectso Espinoza’s reinstatement in the Public Ministry will remain in force while the case is evaluated in the second instance.
The failure of Ninth Constitutional Court of Lima also confirmed that the JNJ was duly notified of the judicial resolution that ordered Espinoza’s reinstatement, rejecting the argument of the control body that alleged that it had not been formally informed. With this, the court reaffirmed the validity of the process followed by the supreme prosecutor to return to her position.
However, the court considered Espinoza’s request for his reinstatement to be forcibly executed “premature,” indicating that said request must be resolved once a final ruling is issued. In this way, the case will continue its judicial process while the confrontation between the Prosecutor’s Office and the JNJ for the validity of the measure.
