The National Prosecutor’s Office says it has “over 190 elements” of evidence against Pedro Castillo.

public service This Wednesday, a constitutional corruption complaint filed a week ago against President Pedro Castillo contains more than “190 pieces” of evidence supporting the thesis that the president is the alleged leader of a criminal organization.

“This complaint contains a detailed series of allegations, and each allegation has relevant evidence. This body of evidence, consisting of more than 190 elements, supports each prosecution structure in detail so that the defense can exercise the relevant right,” the Supreme Deputy Prosecutor emphasized. Marco Huaman during a briefing with accredited foreign press in Lime.

Waman, coordinator Specialized area of ​​constitutional complaintsnoted that “the law does not authorize” the prosecutor’s office to advance the timing of these inspections, although he reiterated that the complaint filed by the prosecutor general Patricia Benavidez“is the result of preliminary proceedings or investigative actions that were carried out with the sanction of the chief judge.”

He emphasized that it is now “the exclusive and exceptional ability of Congress” to develop a process to reach a final decision on the matter, although he reiterated that “a rule of procedure indicates a reservation of investigations.”

“It is up to Congress whether or not to disclose this evidentiary material,” he said, before saying prosecutors “outside” cannot “enter.”

Tax complaint against the president

Fiscal Patricia Benavidez A week ago, he sent a constitutional complaint to Congress against Pedro Castillo as the alleged perpetrator of the criminal organization’s crimes of aggravating his status as a leader, aggravating influence peddling and an accomplice in a crime against public administration in the form of conspiracy (fraud).

Castillo’s executive branch and defense argue that Article 117 of the Constitution states that the President can only be charged in the exercise of his functions in four specific cases, including treason or obstruction of elections, but not for corruption or common crimes.

During a meeting this Wednesday, the senior prosecutor Rafael Velacoordinator Prosecutors specializing in money launderingadded that the complaint was “without a doubt an unprecedented situation” in his country, as it was the first time that an acting ruler had been involved.

However, he felt that Prosecutor Benavidez was on the “right track” in her decision and stated that prosecutors were not focusing “on political ideology” but were investigating “serious cases”.

Vela said that money laundering attorney “He took an active part” in this preliminary investigation process, taking a confession from businesswoman Karelim Lopez, an interest manager who in recent years has maintained ties with the highest echelons of power.

Right to protection

Prosecutor Vela, who is investigating the Lava Yato and Odebrecht cases in Peru, considered that after the forensic examination, the investigation against the president was “fully justified”, and expressed the hope that “there will be no impunity”.

“The investigation against the president also implies the right to defend him,” he said, later saying that the prosecutor’s office hoped that the investigation could be continued.

Wahman added in this regard that “the evidentiary material was collected, which allows us to assert that the procedural stage corresponding to the process was observed.”

The complaint now has to be heard by the Congressional Subcommittee on Constitutional Charges, which has also asked the Constitutional Court (CC) to interpret the country’s Magna Carta to determine whether the charge against the president can continue.

(According to EFE).

OUR RPP PODCASTS:

– “DNA interview”: The Constitutional Court has no advisory function, clarifies one of its judges.

Cesar Augusto Ochoa Cardic, TC magistrate, said the request submitted by Congress regarding Article 117 of the Constitution would be an extension of the jurisdictional action filed against the judiciary regarding the resolution on the Ombudsman election process.