He Judiciary declared the complaint inadmissible defamation aggravated that interposed Ivan Quispe Palomino against him Minister of the Interior, Juan José Santiváñezand the premier Gustavo Adrianzen.
Quispe Palomino filed the complaint for having been presented on October 16 by Santiváñez as “the number two of Sendero Luminoso”, after being improperly intercepted when he returned to his home in San Juan de Lurigancho.
“We are talking about one of the most important commands. Sendero Luminoso is currently led by two brothers, Víctor and Iván. We have just captured Iván and we continue in the footsteps of Víctor, who we hope to have him soon,” said the head of the Interior in RPP News.
In the afternoon of that day, when experts had already destroyed the accusation against Ivan Quispe Palomino, Adrianzen said at a press conference: “This discrepancy that exists in the DNI of the terrorist criminal – because we have to call him that, terrorist criminal, we must not whitewash him, it is about a terrorist criminal and a criminal who has been convicted before and who has three requirements- (…) he has up to three identities and was captured with a false ID.”
However, everything was a very serious mistake by the Police and of Government.
Indeed, Ivan Quispe He was related to the terrorist organization and for this reason he served 10 years in prison, from 1995 to 2005. Later, he was kept away from all subversive activity, especially from his brothers who, according to experts, considered him a “traitor.” In addition to this, it emerged that he was an informant for the Counter Terrorism Directorate of the Police (Dircote PNP).
Regarding the requirements, the Judiciary indicated that the Police mistakenly included the aliases of Victor Quispe Palomino as if they were their own names. One of the nicknames of the leader of the Militarized Communist Party of Peru is comrade ‘Iván’.
Another no less minor fact is that the request indicated that Victor He is missing a finger. Ivan He doesn’t have any mutilated fingers.
For all this series of negligence, the Criminal Court ordered his release and sent the information to the Police Inspectorate already Prosecutor’s Office so that they proceed against the responsible police officers.
Quispe Palomino regained his freedom after two days of being arbitrarily detained.
Defective complaint
According to the judicial file accessed The Republicthe complaint was not admitted due to formal errors. He Sixteenth Unipersonal Criminal Court of Lima declared the complaint inadmissible November 4 and gave a period of 3 days to Ivan Quispe to correct the complaint.
The defense presented its written remedy within the indicated period; However, the court reiterated that not all of the noted defects were corrected.
For example, according to the resolution, the file was not attached Reniec of Santiváñez nor of Adrianzenessential so that they can be properly notified.
Nor was it substantiated why he requests civil compensation amounting to 750,000 soles to each of the accused. Much less was the relevance, usefulness and relevance of the three videos presented as evidence of the aggravated defamation.
Therefore, in the first instance, the Judged The complaint was deemed not to have been filed and its definitive archive was ordered once it was approved.
Quispe You can appeal the decision to seek to reverse this decision. However, if the first instance ruling is confirmed by the Appeals Chamberyou will not be able to sue again Santiváñez and Adrianzen for the same fact.
They do not admit a complaint by Iván Quispe Palomino against Santiváñez and Adrianzén.
Santiváñez does not admit his mistake
- The minister Juan José Santiváñez refused to acknowledge his mistake in hastily reporting the capture of Ivan Quispe Palomino to the media. He also didn’t want to apologize.
- Santiváñez He said that he has no reason to apologize to “a person who has attacked police officers, against mayors, who shot two people dead.” “I am not going to ask him, ever, nor am I going to give in, much less give in to a person like him. (…) He has every right to demand what he considers pertinent and I will defend myself in due course,” declared the minister in interview with Canal N.
