The President of the Constitutional Court of Peru confirms the necessity of releasing Alberto Fujimori

For nearly fifteen years, one of the big issues that has divided Peruvians has been whether Alberto Fujimori, the man who ruled Peru in the 1990s, deserves freedom or spends the final years of his life in prison. In December 2017, on Christmas Eve, economist Pedro Pablo Kuczynski granted him a humanitarian pardon due to his deteriorating health condition. This lit a spark and the crowd took to the streets in protest. Finally, after spending a few months in the Centenario Clinic, the presidential pardon was revoked and Fujimori returned to Barbadillo Prison. Father Keiko Fujimori is sentenced to 25 years in prison for being the intellectual author of crimes against humanity.

But the story took another turn in the past few hours. Although the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) ordered that the release of the former president not be implemented, a decision of the Constitutional Court ordered the referral of its decision to the court to restore the humanitarian amnesty number approved by A. Issuing a subpoena In March 2022. Although the current Minister of Justice, Eduardo Arana, initially confirmed that the IACHR decision remained valid, the President of the Constitutional Court, Francisco Morales Saravia, was frank this afternoon on the issue: “The answer is yes (the release of Fujimori is appropriate), because what we have decided is a clarification. The rulings of the court must be followed and adhered to, just like the decisions of the Supreme Court, but in this case the ruling of the Constitutional Court prevails. We greatly appreciate the decisions of the court and its diligence, but in “This case we have not decided on this point and in any case there may be debate about the scope of this decision or not.”

Lawyer Anna Neira sheds more light on this issue and suggests using the law as an instrument: “Are the statements of the President of the Constitutional Court that Alberto Fujimori should be released, or does his release depend on the ‘administrative powers’ shared by the majority of members of Parliament?” The Constitutional Court (which declared the clarification unacceptable)? If it was considered that there were no impediments to the pardon, this should have been mentioned in the order (decision); The decision of the Inter-American Court, which is mandatory, will be ignored. “Press releases, fortunately, are not a source of law.”

Keiko Fujimori, leader of Popular Power and heir to the patriarch, broke the silence of recent months and announced the end of the pardon for her 87-year-old father. He has been deprived of his freedom for more than 16 years. I think that’s enough. We are not here in a discussion to understand or analyze whether Alberto Fujimori is guilty or innocent because there is a decision and a human pardon, and after that there are two decisions from the Constitutional Court in our country that ratify this decision. “We are very excited that my father can be home with us,” he said.

Lawyer Alberto Croces thinks the same way as Neira: “The clarification should not be too much. This decision (which does not constitute a sentence) does not affect the American mandate that suspends the pardon of Fujimori. The pardon is not suspended because we were waiting for clarification, but because Peru has international obligations.”

Follow all international information on Facebook And sor in Our weekly newsletter.