2017–2020 Peruvian political crisis

The president of the Council of Ministers, Fernando Zavala, next to some of the members of his ministerial cabinet.

Other ministers during a protocol ceremony.

On 17 August 2017 the congresspeople of Popular Force filed a motion of interpellation against the Minister of Education Marilú Martens who was in negotiations with the representatives of the teachers, in search of the solution to a prolonged teacher strike.[48]

On 25 August 2017, the plenary session of the Congress approved the motion of interpellation, with 79 votes in favor, 12 against and 6 abstentions. The votes in favor were from the bench of Popular Force, APRA, Broad Front and Popular Action. The date of the interpellation was set as 8 September.

The minister answered a list of 40 questions, mainly about the teachers' strike that still persisted.[49] Martens acknowledged deficiencies in facing the teachers' strike, but assured that her management would not reverse the recognition of meritocracy within the teaching profession.

On 13 September, the Popular Force bench announced that it would submit a motion of censure against the minister, since it considered that it had not responded satisfactorily to the questions of the interpellation.[50]

Faced with this threat of censorship (which would be the second against a head of Education in less than a year), Prime Minister Fernando Zavala asked Congress a question of confidence for the full ministerial cabinet; in other words, a renewal of the vote of confidence that had been given to him at the beginning of his administration.[51]

From the Congress this request was criticized, stating that Zavala was in solidarity with a minister who was questioned, endangering her entire cabinet, and even more, when the motion of censure had not yet been made official. It was also said that the "renewal of trust" was something that the Constitution did not contemplate.[52]

In any case, the Board of Spokespersons of the Congress summoned Zavala at four o'clock in the afternoon of 14 September to support her request for confidence. Zavala presented himself to the plenary session of the Congress with the ministers and presented his request in 12 minutes; his argument focused on the government's intention to defend the education policy that was intended, according to him, to undermine the education minister's censure. Then we proceeded to the parliamentary debate.[51]

The question of trust was debated for 7 hours and voted in the early morning of 15. The cabinet failed to obtain the confidence of the Parliament, which voted against the confidence with 77, which produced the total crisis of the cabinet.[53]

Taking of the oath of the second ministerial cabinet.

On 17 September 2017, the second vice president and congresswoman Mercedes Aráoz Fernández was sworn in as president of the Council of Ministers of Peru and with this, five new ministers were announced: Claudia Cooper Fort (Economy), Idel Vexler (Education), Enrique Mendoza Ramírez (Justice and Human Rights), Fernando d'Alessio (Health) and Carlos Bruce (Housing).

The new head of the cabinet was sworn in with the 18 ministers in a ceremony held in the Court of Honor of the Government Palace. On 6 October, the vote of confidence will be given and if this is rejected for the second time, the president can dissolve the Congress and call new elections, as the Constitution of 1993 says.

The vote of confidence was delayed until 12 October, beginning with the exhibitions of the new cabinet led by Mercedes Aráoz Fernández and subsequent intervention of the different political caucuses of the Congress until 0:30 a.m. of the next day. It resulted in 83 votes in favor and 17 against.[54]

Various political figures such as the media reported on the denial of confidence in the first cabinet; the journalist Rosa María Palacios sent a message to the president asking him to dissolve the Congress[55] and warned that "Fujimorism has been trapped",[56] the journalist César Hildebrandt also sent a message to the president saying that "the country requires him to confront Congress Fujimorist".[57]

The former constitutional lawyer in an interview said that the now former president of the Council of Ministers Fernando Zavala "is sacrificing for state policies",[58] the former president of the Council of Ministers Pedro Cateriano warned that "Keiko Fujimori, leader of the Popular Force party, wants to give a coup d'etat".[59]

Presidents and important figures of South American countries during the founding of the Acre Integration Bridge: The third on the left is Alejandro Toledo Manrique, president of Peru and the one next to him is Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, president of Brazil. Both accused by corruption cases.

In November 2017, the Lava Jato Commission of the Congress, chaired by Rosa Bartra and that was dedicated to investigate the implications in Peru of the corruption network of the Odebrecht organization, received confidential information that President Kuczynski had had labor ties with this company, which went back to the time when he was Minister of State between 2004 and 2006, under the government of Alejandro Toledo Manrique, despite the fact that since the outbreak of the Odebrecht case, Kuczynski had denied him on several occasions.

The Commission then asked the Odebrecht company for details of its relationship with Kuczynski, which were publicly disclosed on 13 December 2017. It was revealed then that Westfield Capital, an investment banking advisory firm, founded and directed by Kuczynski had carried out seven consultancies for Odebrecht between November 2004 and December 2007 for 782,207 million dollars, that is, coinciding with the time when Kuczynski had been Minister of Economy (2004–2005) and President of the Council of Ministers (2005–2006). The information also revealed that another company closely related to Kuczynski, First Capital, formed by its Chilean partner Gerardo Sepúlveda, had also provided consulting services for Odebrecht between 2005 and 2013.[60]

The information was seriously compromising for the president, because the payments to his personal consulting company had been made when he was Minister of State and in the case of consultancies referring to public works that the company carried out in Peru. This went against the constitutional rule that prevents state ministers from managing private businesses in the exercise of their public function (conflict of interest). Further complicating the matter was the fact that these payments came from a company like Odebrecht, which is now known to have paid bribes to win the concession for works under the government of Toledo, when Kuczynski had been minister, one of which was the construction of the interoceanic route to Brazil.

Although Odebrecht's payments to the consulting firms related to PPK were legal, there were those who speculated that it could have been part of the company's remuneration for favoring it in the good of the works.

Pedro Pablo Kuczynski next to his vice-presidents, Martín Vizcarra and Mercedes Aráoz, in a message to the Nation prior to the first vacancy session.

The opposition to the government, led by Fuerza Popular, demanded the resignation of Kuczynski and threatened him with vacancy from the Presidency if he did not do so. Broad Front, for its part, stated that the vacancy should proceed directly.

At midnight on 14 December, Kuczynski, through a message to the nation, denied the accusations and said he would not resign his position. "I am here to tell you: I am not going to abdicate my honor or my values or my responsibilities as president of all Peruvians," he said at the outset.

In his defense, he claimed to have no relationship with the company First Capital, which was the sole property of Sepúlveda, and that only one of the payments mentioned had to do with him, the one dated in 2012, when he was no longer Minister of State. As for Westfield Capital, although he acknowledged that it was his sole proprietorship, he affirmed that he was never under his direction and administration while he was Minister of State, and that the contracts dated at that time had been signed by Sepúlveda, his partner. He also noted that all payments to his company were legal, and that they were duly registered, billed and banked.[61]

PPK's explanations did not convince the opposition, and he was accused of continuing to lie, especially in relation to the fact that he had left Westfield Capital when he was minister, when, according to public records, he always figured as director of that company. Although PPK argued that there had been a "Chinese wall", an expression used in business to refer to when the partner or owner has no contact or receive information on the management of the company, while in public office (but in the case of Wesfield Capital, being a company where PPK was its sole agent, it is unclear how this "Chinese wall" could be made). Faced with the refusal of the president to resign, several of the opposition caucuses of Congress then proposed to submit their position to the vacancy.

The leftist Broad Front bench submitted a motion for the vacancy request to be debated in the plenary session of the Congress. The congresspersons of Fuerza Popular, APRA and Alianza para el Progreso joined the request and that is how they surpassed more than the 26 signatures needed to proceed with the process. Once the motion was approved, the debate began at 4 and 38 in the afternoon of 15 December and lasted until 10 at night.

The opposition legislators who introduced the motion cited a moral incapacity when they denounced that the president lied in the statements he gave about his ties with the Brazilian company.

The congressmen demanded that the due process be followed, reproaching the fact that the opposition proceeded with unusual speed and that several of its members had already decided to empty the president without having heard his defense. They also questioned the fact that a single report from Odebrecht was considered sufficient evidence, thereby overtly dispensing with the investigation that demanded such a delicate and far-reaching case.

According to the regulations, the vote of 40% of competent congressmen was needed for the admission of the vacancy request. As 118 congressmen were present, only 48 votes were needed, which was widely exceeded, as they voted 93 in favor and 17 against; these last ones were, in their great majority, those of the pro-government caucus.[62]

Once the vacancy request was approved, the Congress agreed that on Thursday, 21 December, at 9 o'clock in the morning, Kuczynski should appear before the plenary session of the Congress to make his disclaimers; then it would proceed to debate and finally vote to decide the presidential vacancy, needed for this 87 votes of the total of 130 congressmen.[63]

On the appointed day, PPK went to Congress to exercise his defense, accompanied by his lawyer Alberto Borea Odría. The defense began with the speech of the president himself, in which he denied having committed any act of corruption. Then came Borea's defense, which had as its axis the consideration that the vacancy request was an exaggeration because you could not accuse a president of the Republic without demonstrating with irrefutable evidence his "permanent moral incapacity", a concept that the congressmen did not they had apparently very clear, because strictly the constitutional precept would be referring to a mental incapacity. He considered that the offenses or imputed crimes had to be ventilated first in the investigating commission, before drawing hasty conclusions. He also rejected that PPK has repeatedly lied about his relationship with Odebrecht (argument that the Fujimoristas used to justify their permanent moral incapacity), because the facts in question had happened twelve years ago and he did not have to have them present in detail.[64]

After the speech of Borea, the congressional debate that lasted fourteen hours began. Voting for the vacancy took place after eleven o'clock at night, with the following result: 78 votes in favor, 19 against and 21 abstentions. One of the benches, the one of New Peru (left), retired before the voting, because to say of its members they did not want to follow the game to Fujimorism. Since 87 votes were needed to proceed with the vacancy, this was dismissed.[65] The whole Popular Force bench voted in favor of the vacancy, with the exception of 10 of its members, led by Kenji Fujimori, who abstained, and who thus decided the result. The rumor spread that this dissident group, which would later be called the "Avengers", had negotiated its votes with the government in exchange for the presidential pardon in favor of Alberto Fujimori, its historical leader who was then imprisoned.[66] After the Popular Force bench and led by Kenji announced the formation of a new political group, which would support the government.[67]

The Centennial Clinic, place where Alberto Fujimori was hospitalized at the time of receiving the pardon.

On 24 December 2017, President PPK granted a humanitarian pardon to Alberto Fujimori, who had been imprisoned for 12 years, with a sentence of 25 years for crimes of human rights violations (La Cantuta and Barrios Altos cases).[68] The government assured that the pardon had been decided for purely humanitarian reasons, in view of the various physical ills afflicting the former president of the Republic, confirmed by reports of a medical board.[69]

However, a strong suspicion arose that the pardon would have been the result of a furtive pact of the PPK government with the sector of the Fujimorist bloc that had abstained during the vote for the presidential vacancy and that had thus prevented it from concrete this. The pardon also motivated the resignation of the official congressmen Alberto de Belaunde, Vicente Zeballos and Gino Costa; of the Minister of Culture Salvador del Solar and Minister of Defense Jorge Nieto Montesinos. The Minister of the Interior, Carlos Basombrío Iglesias, had already resigned. There were also several marches in Lima and the interior of the country in protest against the pardon.

Alberto Fujimori, who days before the pardon had been admitted to a clinic for complications in his health, was discharged on 4 January 2018 and so could, for the first time, move freely.[70]

PPK formed a new ministerial cabinet, which he called "the Cabinet of Reconciliation," which according to him, should mark a new stage in the relationship between the Executive and the Legislative. Mercedes Aráoz held the presidency of the Council of Ministers and eight ministerial changes were made, the most important renewal in what was going on in the government.[71]

On 15 November 2017, through Bill No. 2133, Congressman Mauricio Mulder presented the Mulder Law, which prohibited state advertising in private media and on 28 February 2018 approved the bill by the Permanent Commission of the Congress with 20 in favor, 3 against and 14 abstentions.[72][73] The ruling was approved at the urging of APRA and Fujimorism on 15 June 2018 with 70 votes in favor, 30 against and 7 abstentions.[74][75] and it was published on 18 June 2018 in the Legal Rules of the Official Gazette El Peruano.[76]

Local of Odebrecht in the financial district of San Isidro, this company has been accused of having bribed the main political leaders of Peru.

Only days after the first attempt at a presidential vacancy, in January 2018, the Broad Front caucus filed a new vacancy request, alleging Alberto Fujimori's pardon, which allegedly had been negotiated and granted illegally. This did not prosper, given the lack of support from Fuerza Popular, whose votes were necessary to carry out such an initiative. Under that experience, the leftist groups of Broad Front and Nuevo Peru promoted another vacancy motion, concentrating exclusively on the Odebrecht case, arguing that new indications of corruption and conflict of interest had been discovered by PPK when he was Minister of State in the government of Alejandro Toledo.[77] This time they won the support of Fuerza Popular, as well as other groups like Alianza para el Progreso (whose spokesperson, César Villanueva, was the main promoter of the initiative), thus gathering the 27 minimum votes necessary to present a multiparty motion before the Congress of the Republic, what was done on 8 March 2018.[78]

On 15 March, the admission of this motion was debated in the plenary session of the Congress, the result being 87 votes in favor, 15 votes against and 15 abstentions. The motion received the backing of all the benches, except for Peruvians for Change and non-grouped congressmen, among them, the three former pro-government officials and the Kenji Fujimori bloc.[79] The Board of Spokespersons scheduled the debate on the presidential vacancy request for Thursday, 22 March.

A confidential report from the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) on the money movements of PPK's bank accounts was forwarded to the Public Ministry and the Lava Jato Commission of Congress, but inexplicably leaked to public knowledge. This 33-page document revealed that from the companies and consortiums linked to the Odebrecht Group transfers had been made to Westfield Capital, the one-person PPK company, for $1,893,841, that is, one million more than what was known the moment. Transfers made to the account of the driver of PPK and that of Gilbert Violeta were also revealed, although it was shown that these were only payments of a labor nature and of basic services.[80] The leak of this report, which is presumed to have been made by the Lava Jato Commission chaired by Rosa Bartra, would have been with the intention of further identifying the credibility of the President of the Republic. But the death blow for PPK came a few days later.

Kenji Fujimori, congressman of the republic involved in the Kenjivideos.

On 20 March 2018, the Popular Force bench showed evidence that the government was buying the support of congressmen to vote against the second presidential vacancy request, a rumor that had already circulated during the first process. It was a set of videos where the conversations made by the legislators Bienvenido Ramírez and Guillermo Bocángel (from the bench of Kenji Fujimori) to try to convince Congressman Moisés Mamani (from Puno) not to join to support the presidential vacancy, in exchange for works for your region. In one of the videos, Kenji Fujimori is seen in a meeting with Mamani, which also includes Bienvenido Ramírez. The latter makes a series of offers to the parliamentarian from Puno to enable him to streamline projects and projects for his region, in exchange for joining his group and supporting PPK. In another video we see Bocángel talking about the administrative control of the Congress, once they access the Board. And in a third video, we see Alberto Borea Odría, PPK's lawyer on the subject of vacancy, explaining to Mamani about aspects of that process and giving him the telephone number of a minister of state. Those involved in the scandal, came out to defend themselves, saying that it was normal practice for congressmen to turn to ministers to ask for works in favor of their regions. Congressman Bienvenido even said that he had only "bragged". But what was questioned was the fact that the government negotiated these works in order to reorient the vote of a group of congressmen on the issue of the presidential vacancy, which would constitute the criminal figure of influence peddling.[12]

A few hours later, the Fujimoristas gave the final thrust, by broadcasting a set of audios, in which the Minister of Transport and Communications, Bruno Giuffra is heard offering works to Mamani in exchange for his vote to avoid the vacancy. The press highlighted a phrase by Giuffra in which he says: "Compadre, you know what the nut is and what you are going to get out", presumably referring to the benefits Mamani would gain if he voted against the vacancy.[81]

Until then, it was expected that the vote to achieve the vacancy would be very tight and that even PPK could again succeed as had happened in the first process. But the Kenjivideos determined that several congressmen who until then had manifested their abstention (among them the three ex- oficialistas) folded in favor of the vacancy, and thus they made it known openly.[82]

Pedro Pablo Kuczynski announcing his resignation from the presidential office in his last message to the nation.

Faced with the foreseeable scenario that awaited him in the debate scheduled for the Congress on the 22nd, PPK opted to renounce the Presidency of the Republic, sending the respective letter to Congress, and giving a televised message to the Nation, which was transmitted to the two and forty in the afternoon of 21 March 2018.[83]

I think the best thing for the country is for me to renounce the Presidency of the Republic. I do not want to be a stumbling block for our nation to find the path of unity and harmony that is so badly needed and denied to me. I do not want the country or my family to continue suffering with the uncertainty of recent times (...) There will be a constitutionally ordered transition.

— Kuczynski, in his message of resignation to the Presidency of the Republic. Lima, March 21, 2018.

The Board of Spokespersons of the Congress, although rejected the terms of the letter of resignation of PPK, arguing that this did not make any self-criticism and victimized, accepted the same and scheduled for 22 March, from four in the afternoon, a debate in Congress to evaluate the resignation. That debate lasted until the next day.[84] Although a section of congressmen on the left argued that the resignation of PPK should not be accepted and that Congress should proceed to vacancy due to moral incapacity, the majority of congressmen considered that it should be accepted, in order to put an end to the crisis. When the preliminary text of the resolution of the Congress was published, in which it was indicated that the president had "betrayed the fatherland", PPK announced that it would withdraw its letter of resignation if that qualification was maintained. The Board of Spokesmen decided then to omit that expression. The resignation was accepted with 105 votes in favor, 12 against and 3 abstentions.[85] Moments later, the first vice-president Martín Vizcarra was sworn in as the new constitutional president of the Republic.[86] Soon after, the new government announced that its prime minister would be César Villanueva, the same who had been the main promoter of the second Presidential vacancy against PPK.

Palace of Justice of Lima, headquarters of the Supreme Court and symbol of the judicial power.

On 7 July 2018 the portal IDL-Reporters led by journalist Gustavo Gorriti broadcast a series of audios through the journalistic program Panorama. Thus, a serious corruption scandal called CNM Audios or Court and Corruption case was uncovered. These are telephone tapping that reveal alleged acts of corruption and influence peddling that directly involved judges and members of the Council of the Magistracy (CNM). In the audios we listen to César José Hinostroza Pariachi (supreme judge), Iván Noguera Ramos (counselor), Julio Gutiérrez (counselor) and Walter Ríos (president of the Superior Court of Callao), negotiating and using his personal influence in areas of government, through connections with people, and in order to obtain favors and preferential treatment.[87] These controversial audios had been leaked by the journalists of an investigation approved by prosecutor Rocío Sánchez Saavedra to intercept the telephone calls of numbers seized by the police to a criminal organization dedicated to drug trafficking (the castanets of Richport), which operated in the port of Callao. These telephone numbers belonged to the lawyers of that organization who contacted the judicial authorities, and it was thus, in that accidental manner, that the scandal that has led the crisis to the entire judicial system of Peru was uncovered.[88][89]

On 11 July 2018, President Vizcarra announced the creation of a commission to reform the Judiciary (chaired by Allan Wagner Tizón) and that same day the President of the Supreme Court of Justice Duberlí Rodríguez announced a crisis in the judicial system.[90] On the other hand, the supreme Internal Control Prosecutor, Víctor Raúl Rodríguez Monteza, gave IDL-Reporters and the Panorama program three days to deliver the audios and their sources.[91][92] However, this did not materialize because the wiretaps contained in those audios had been given legally, and because journalists are not obliged to reveal their sources because of their right to confidentiality. In the following days more audios were made known that involved characters from all areas, not just politics.

On 13 July 2018, the Minister of Justice and Human Rights of Peru Salvador Heresi presented his resignation letter because in one of those audios he is heard talking to the controversial judge César Hinostroza. In his replacement, lawyer and congressman Vicente Zeballos Salinas, who had been a member of the PPK parliamentary caucus, was appointed.[93]

Before the institutional crisis in the Judicial Power, Duberlí Rodríguez resigned to the presidency of the Supreme Court of Justice on 19 July 2018.[94] The next day he was appointed to preside over the First Chamber of Constitutional and Social Transitional Law of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic.[95]

On 20 July 2018, following the resignation of Supreme Court President Duberlí Rodríguez as a consequence of the CNM Audios scandal, Francisco Távara Córdova, in his capacity as supreme dean, assumed the presidency of said institution on an interim basis.[96]

The swearing in of Pedro Chávarry as the new prosecutor of the Nation.

On 7 June 2018 attorney Pedro Chávarry was elected by the Board of Supreme Prosecutors of the Public Ministry as Prosecutor of the Nation for the period 2018–2021.[97] On 3 July, the National Board of Justice ratified it unanimously as supreme prosecutor.[98] Twelve days later (On 19 July 2018) an audio was broadcast between Judge César Hinostroza and the elected fiscal of the Nation, Pedro Chávarry, which caused massive protests at the national level to request his resignation, however on 20 July 2018 he was sworn in as Prosecutor of the Nation.[99] Despite being involved in the corruption scandal, prosecutor Chávarry refused to resign his position.[100]

On 3 October, the Judicial Branch issued placement and arrest warrants against former President Alberto Fujimori. His lawyers had 5 days (from 4 October) to support an appeal.[101] On 9 October, the appeal filed by his lawyers was rejected. Next, the judge ordered to locate him and capture him, an end of the sea re-entered in a prison.[102]

I want to tell the authorities and politicians today, because I no longer have the strength to resist it. (...) I want to ask the President of the Republic, the members of the Judiciary, only one thing: please do not kill me. If I go back to prison, my heart will not endure it, it is too weak to be able to go through the same. Do not condemn me to death, I do not give more "

— Alberto Fujimori, at the Centenario clinic, where he was interned, on October 5, 2018.[103]

As a result of the annulment of the pardon, the legislators at the end of Fujimorism, would approve a series of reforms among them are:

• One that validates the immediate reelection of the deputies.
• Reinstalls two cameras in Congress and indicates that its members will be called parliamentarians.
• It eliminates the mechanism of trust that allows the president to close the Congress.
• It removes the obligation of the legislators to present a declaration of their patrimonial assets.
• Excludes the principles of irreproachable conduct and parity.
• Rejects the criterion of representation of the indigenous population.[104]

On 10 October, in the Office of the Prosecutor of Peru, Judge Richard Concepción Carhuancho, ordered a preliminary detention of Keiko Fujimori, for 10 days against him, for the alleged illicit contributions to the 2011 campaign from the Odebrecht company.[105][106]

The Office of the Prosecutor does not cite any evidence in the judicial decision. A person is given preliminary detention when there is a well-founded risk, or a well-founded suspicion, of a procedural danger. What is the danger if we are going to the Attorney's office voluntarily? What is the risk of flight?

— Defense of Keiko Fujimori at the time of the arrest.[107]

On 17 October, after an appeal, he was released, along with five other detainees, because he did not find feasible evidence of his responsibility.[108]

César Hinostroza, involved in the CNM Audios case.

The dismissed Judge Hinostroza, who was weighed by an order preventing him from leaving the country since 13 July for the alleged crimes of passive bribery and active bribery, for a period of four months. He would leave the country illegally, violating the law and leaving clandestinely in the north of the country, on 7 October at dawn hours.[109] Ten days later (17 October), the information would be publicly known, after which Interior Minister Mauro Medina, would present his resignation, after being identified by the political class as one of the responsible for the escape of the syndicate leader of the organization "The White Collars of the Port".[110] The next day the removal of José Abanto from the Oficialía Mayor occurred, due to the delay in sending the prosecutorial file against Judge César Hinostroza to the Prosecutor's Office, appointing Gianmarco Paz Mendoza as his replacement.[111]

On 19 October 2018, prosecutor José Domingo Pérez formalized the preparatory investigation and requested 36 months of preventive detention for Keiko Fujimori and eleven other persons involved for alleged money laundering (among them: Jaime Yoshiyama, his nephew Jorge Yoshiyama, Vicente Silva Checa, Augusto Bedoya, Ana Herz and Pier Figari). After reviewing the request for pretrial detention, Judge Richard Concepción Carhuancho began to review the one of the other ten people around Keiko, but on 31 October 2018, when he had only assessed the legal status of five of them, he decided surprisingly give your verdict regarding Keiko Fujimori. After accepting the tax thesis that accused him of being the head of a presumed criminal organization within his party that lavished a million dollars given by Odebrecht in 2011, and considering that there was a risk that it would hinder the process, the judge dictated 36 months of preventive detention for Keiko Fujimori.[112]

On 15 November 2018, Alan García went to a meeting with the prosecution of money laundering, as part of an interrogation, carried out by, part of the prosecutor José Domingo Pérez due to irregularities in the conference payments of the former president, financed with money from Caja 2 of the structured operations division of the Odebrecht company, before this the prosecutor issued an order to prevent him from leaving the country for 18 months for García, even though at first he said he was at the disposition of the justice, that same night he went to the home of Carlos Alejandro Barros, ambassador of Uruguay, where he remained until 3 December 2018, when Tabaré Vázquez, president of that country, announced the rejection of Alan García's asylum request, consider that in Peru the three branches of the State functioned freely and without political persecution.[113][114]

José Domingo Pérez, provincial prosecutor investigating the Odebretch case in Peru.

On 31 December 2018, when the prosecutor of the Nation Pedro Chávarry removed prosecutors Rafael Vela Barba and José Domingo Pérez from the Odebrecht case in Peru, he replaced prosecutors Frank Almanza Altamirano and Marcial Eloy Paucar, respectively. This fact provoked multiple protests at the national level led by the antifujimorism. In a press conference called for the closing of 2018, Pedro Chávarry said he made that decision, since the prosecutors in question, who had important investigations, had "affected the Public Prosecutor's Office" with their comments through different means of communication.

For his part, President Martin Vizcarra, who was in Brazil to take command of Jair Bolsonaro, questioned Chávarry's decision and immediately returned to Peru. On 2 January 2019, Vizcarra presented before the Congress a bill that declared emergency in the Public Ministry, that same day Pedro Chávarry before the massive protests against him decided to reinstate Rafael Vela Barba and José Domingo Pérez in the lava case jato However, he refrained from resigning.[115]

Pedro Chávarry, prosecutor of the nation involved in the CNM Audios case.

On 7 January 2019, Chávarry indicated that he was going to present his resignation letter. On 8 January, before the Board of Supreme Prosecutors, Chávarry resigned as president of the Public Prosecutor's Office.[116] On 8 January, the Board accepted the resignation of Chávarry and appointed Supreme Public Prosecutor Zoraida Ávalos as the new interim Nation Prosecutor. Who in his first message as president of the Office of the Prosecutor declared the Public Prosecutor's Office in emergency.[117][118]

On 16 January 2019, the Second National Criminal Appeals Chamber decided to remove Judge Richard Concepción Carhuancho from the case of cocktails for which Keiko Fujimori and other members of Fuerza Popular have been investigated. This measure was presented by the defense of Jaime Yoshiyama. The challenge against Judge Richard Concepción was evaluated by the Second National Criminal Court of Appeals, composed of judges César Salhuanay Calsin, Jessica León Yarango and Iván Quispe Auca. Who made that decision unanimously.[119]

According to the resolution of the Second Chamber, the judges considered that public statements by Richard Concepción Carhuancho questioned his impartiality, so that the case passed into the hands of another judge of the National Criminal Chamber. This event unleashed new social protests led by antifujimorism in different cities of the country.[120]

On 23 January 2019 Alberto Fujimori was transferred again to the Barbadillo prison in the Ate District, where he was interned from 2007 to 2017, serving his sentence before being pardoned. The former president was discharged from the Centennial Clinic after a medical board of the Institute of Legal Medicine evaluated him and determined that he is stable and that he can receive treatment for his ailments.[121]

On 15 February 2019, the collaboration agreement with Odebrecht was signed in São Paulo between the Lava Jato special team and senior officials of the Odebrecht company. Among the information that the company will provide is the My Web Day and Drousys systems, corporate software in which requested, processed and controlled the operations of the payment of bribes, names, data, dates, reports and evidence that can be used in a trial the politicians involved.[122]

The agreement was criticized by numerous congressmen, this because the total amount of civil compensation was not taken into account and the company obtained benefits on the management of its profits, with the possibility of re-contracting with the State of Peru.[123]

On 17 April 2019, former Peruvian President Alan García committed suicide in the bedroom of his personal home when the officers of the national police had gone to arrest him preliminarily on matters related to the Odebrecht case.[124] His funeral took place at the Casa del Pueblo[125] and was cremated on 19 April at the Catholic cemetery in Huachipa.[126]

García did not receive posthumous government honors such as the state funeral to former leaders,[127] at the request of relatives and supporters of APRA,[128] according to some national and international analysts[129][130] this gesture represents a new nuance of the political crisis in the country that has been developing since 2017.[131][132]

The Peruvian government, through the national daily El Peruano, declared three days of national mourning: 17, 18 and 19 April. According to the Public Prosecutor's Office,[133] the search of García's home that was included in the investigations of the Odebrecht case would continue its normal course, with the exception of the bedroom that remains sealed.[134]

After a 3-day hearing, on 19 April 2019, the Judiciary issued 36 months of pre-trial detention for former President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.[135] However, due to the heart condition he suffers, and that led him to be operated on emergency at the Anglo-American clinic, on April 27 he was exchanged for home detention.[136]

The APRA Congressman Javier Velásquez Quesquén admitted that, although there was never a political alliance between APRA and Popular Force, there was a "strategic alliance" within Congress, which explained that the Board of Directors had shared in two consecutive legislatures, and that coincide in the votes of the plenary and of the commissions.[137] However, other members of the Aprismo and Popular Force rejected the existence of such an alliance, although the facts say otherwise. A study shows that, during the plenary sessions, the majority positions of Popular Force and the APRA caucus coincided 90.2% of the time so far in the current congressional period; that is, in 782 of the 867 votes, Fuerza Popular and APRA went hand in hand.[138]

Peruvians for Change the party that had brought Pedro Pablo Kuczynski to the presidency in 2016, and which, in theory, was the official party of the Vizcarra government, declared a reorganization. Kuczynski himself presented his irrevocable resignation to the party presidency on February 4, 2019.[139] The Peruvians for Change bench in Congress, which was initially 17 members, was reduced to 11. Two of them, Gilbert Violeta (at the same time leader of Peruvians for Change) and Juan Sheput (until then only invited to the party) had friction with Martín Vizcarra, hinting that there was a gap between the party and the government.[140] It was seen that two factions had formed on the Peruvians for Change caucus: a majority faction, led by Mercedes Aráoz and Carlos Bruce, who wanted to continue supporting the government with conditions; and another, commanded by Gilbert Violeta and Juan Sheput, supported by what remained of the game, which aimed to break with Vizcarra.[141] Vizcarra's estrangement from the Peruvians for Change party was further exacerbated by the revelation that the Construction Club had contributed $ 100,000 for the 2016 Kuczynki campaign. The party leaders (Violeta, Heresi and the Peruvians for Change general secretary Jorge Villacorta), agreed to hold Vizcarra responsible for controlling the financing of the campaign, as revealed in conversations on WhatsApp leaked to the press.[142] Not agreeing with this position, three Peruvians for Change congressmen announced their resignation from the party: Jorge Meléndez Celis (bench spokesman), Alberto Oliva and Janet Sánchez, although without affecting their permanence on the Peruvians for Change bench.[143]

On March 2, 2019, the Peruvians for Change party assembly agreed to change its name to Contigo. He also made official the admission to the party of Juan Sheput, who until then had only been invited.[144] Contigo's leadership said the party supported Vizcarra "100%" and considered that the Peruvians for Change caucus in Congress should also change its name. But the Peruvians for Change congressmen, for the most part, agreed to keep the original name. Violeta and Sheput then requested a temporary license from the bench, but the bench did not accept and even opened disciplinary proceedings against them. Given this, both congressmen decided to resign from the bench, which was thus reduced to nine members (March 6, 2019).[145] None of those nine members of the Peruvians for Change caucus, including Mercedes Aráoz and Carlos Bruce, was a member of the party.[146]

On December 21, 2018, the government formalized the formation of the High Level Commission for Political Reform. It was made up of political scientist Fernando Tuesta Soldevilla, as coordinator, and academics Paula Valeria Muñoz Chirinos, Milagros Campos Ramos, Jessica Violeta Bensa Morales and Ricardo Martin Tanaka Dongo.[147] It was installed on January 5, 2019. Based on the report that said Commission gave, the government presented twelve proposals for political reform to Congress (April 11, 2019). However, it excluded the issue of bicamerality, as it was recently rejected in the referendum.[148]

Among the three projects of constitutional reform was the one that sought the balance between the Executive and Legislative powers with the objective of establishing counterweights between both; the reform that modifies the impediments to be a candidate for any position of popular election, in order to improve the suitability of the applicants; and the reform that seeks to extend the regional and municipal mandate to five years, to coincide with the general elections. For the Legislative Branch, it was proposed that the election of the congressmen be carried out in the second presidential round; the elimination of the preferential vote and the establishment of parity and alternation in the list of candidates were proposed. On the other hand, for political parties, the aim was to promote internal democracy and citizen participation in the selection of candidates, establishing internal, open, simultaneous and compulsory elections organized by the ONPE. Other reforms related to the registration and cancellation in the registry of political organizations, and the requirements to keep the registration in force, as well as the regulation of the financing of political organizations, to avoid corruption. Another proposal was that the lifting of parliamentary immunity should not be the responsibility of Congress, but of the Supreme Court of Justice.[148]

On May 29, 2019, from the Great Hall of the Government Palace, President Vizcarra gave a message to the Nation, in which he announced his decision to raise the issue of trust before Congress in support of political reform. This, after the Constitution Commission, with a Fujimori majority, sent the bill on parliamentary immunity to the archive, and the Permanent Commission, also with a Fujimori majority, filed practically all the complaints weighing on the controversial prosecutor Chávarry. The president, accompanied by members of his ministerial cabinet and regional governors, stated that the issue of trust would be based on the approval, without violating its essence, of six of the bills for political reform, considered the most central:[27]

• Changes in parliamentary immunity, so that it does not become impunity.
• Convicted persons may not be candidates.
• Any citizen must participate in the selection of candidates from political organizations, through internal primary elections.
• Eliminate the preferential vote and let the population define it in that previous selection.
• Guarantee the political participation of women with parity and alternation.
• Prohibit the use of dirty money from electoral campaigns.

If Congress denied the issue of confidence, it would be the second time that it did (the previous one went to the Zavala cabinet of the government of Pedro Pablo Kuczynski), for which, according to the Constitution, faced with two refusals, the President would be empowered to dissolve Congress and call new parliamentary elections within four months.

The following day, Prime Minister Salvador del Solar appeared before Congress to deliver the official letter requesting that the time and date of the plenary session be established, in which he will support the issue of trust. In this document, Del Solar indicated that he would propose that the maximum term for the approval of the six political reforms be at the end of the current legislature (June 15); otherwise, it would consider that Congress denied confidence to the ministerial cabinet.[149] In response to the request, Congress President Daniel Salaverry called the plenary session for June 4 to meet the Executive's request for confidence.[150]

The six political reform projects were defined as follows:[151]

• Constitutional reform that states that those convicted in the first instance may not be candidates.
• Legislative reform on internal democracy, which seeks for citizens to participate in the selection of candidates from political organizations, through internal primary elections.
• Legislative reform that seeks to guarantee women's political participation, with parity and alternation, as well as eliminating preferential voting.
• Legislative reform on registration and cancellation of political parties and regional political organizations.
• Legislative reform that seeks to prohibit the use of illegal money in electoral campaigns.
• Constitutional reform to make changes in the process of lifting parliamentary immunity, so that it does not become impunity.

The Constitution Commission invited jurists Raúl Ferrero Costa, Natale Amprimo, Ernesto Álvarez, Aníbal Quiroga and Óscar Urviola to collect their opinions on the Executive's approach and the constitutionality of the approach.

On June 4, 2019, Salvador del Solar appeared in the plenary session of Congress to expose and request the question of trust before the national representation. Previously, a previous question was rejected to evaluate the constitutionality of the trust request. Several voices in Congress considered that imposing a deadline for the approval of constitutional reforms and forcing their essence to be respected was unconstitutional, since reforms of this type were the exclusive responsibility of Congress and the Executive lacked the power to observe them. Due to these criticisms, Del Solar, in his presentation, lightened that part of his demand. He said that Congress was empowered to extend the legislature if necessary, and that it was not obliged to approve the bills to the letter, but could enrich them, although insisting that they should not alter their essence. "This question of trust is not a threat," he concluded.[28]

After the presentation of the Prime Minister, the parliamentary debate began, which had to be extended until the following day. Finally, at noon on June 5, 2019, the vote was held. The question was approved with 77 votes in favor, 44 against and 3 abstentions. The members of the left-wing benches (Frente Amplio and Nuevo Perú) and Apra voted against, while those of Fuerza Popular did so in a divided manner (33 in favor, 16 against and 2 abstentions).[152]

The Constitution commission debated the opinions between June 7 and July 20. A series of changes were made in the projects, but the most striking was what was committed with the latest opinion, on the lifting of immunity of parliamentarians. The Constitution Commission rejected the Executive's proposal that the Supreme Court be in charge of raising immunity for congressmen, providing that Congress continue to retain that prerogative. The only variant was that it proposed definite terms for Congress to lift immunity once the Judicial Power made the respective request. In addition, it was proposed that the request be given only when there is a final judgment.[153]

When the Prime Minister Salvador del Solar was consulted on the opinions approved by the Constitution Commission, he considered that only five respected the spirit of the reforms proposed by the Executive, and that the last one, on parliamentary immunity, meant a setback, since it did not respect the a matter of trust, which had arisen precisely when the Constitution Commission sent the same project to the archive.[154]

The six projects were submitted to the plenary session of Congress, were approved between July 22 and 25, including modifications that further accentuated the distortion of the original projects of the Executive, especially regarding internal democracy and parliamentary immunity.[29]

Daniel Salaverry, elected president of Congress for the 2018-2019 legislature with the support of his then Popular Force bench, starred in a series of confrontations with his co-religionists, marked by a series of epithets, attempts at censorship and accusations, which led him to distance himself of Fuerza Popular and approach President Vizcarra, who saw him as an ally to curb the dominance of Fujimori in Congress. This earned him retaliation from his former bench partners. An investigation of the television program Panorama denounced that Salaverry had repeatedly presented false data in his representation week reports (an obligation that congressmen have to visit the provinces they represent, to listen to the demands of their constituents), which included photos from other events.[155]

Former President Alejandro Toledo, has been a fugitive since 2017, in the United States. Accused of receiving a bribe of US$ 35 million from the Interoceánica Sur, the process for his extradition began. The American court ordered his imprisonment on July 16, 2019, until the extradition request is resolved.

Former President Alejandro Toledo, has been a fugitive since 2017, after the Peruvian justice issued two orders of preventive detention against him: the first in the case of the Interoceánica Sur, for having allegedly received a bribe of US $ 20 million from the company Odebrecht (later it was said that it was US $ 35 million); and the second by the Ecoteva case, under the accusation of money laundering when properties whose value did not correspond to his income were discovered (one of them in the name of his mother-in-law). Both cases are presumed to be connected. To the reiterated testimony of the effective collaborator in the Odebrecht case, Jorge Barata, has been added that of Josef Maiman, an Israeli businessman who had served as figurehead for Toledo. This is one of the most solid cases that the prosecution has.[156]

Located in Toledo, United States, the extradition process was initiated in the Odebrecht case. On July 16, 2019, the American justice ordered his preliminary arrest. On July 19, 2019, the hearing chaired by Judge Thomas Hixson, of the Northern District Court of California, was held to determine his legal situation. He was expected to be released after paying bail, to continue the extradition process in freedom, but the judge determined that he remained in prison as there was danger of escape. One of the arguments in favor of this decision was the fact that a briefcase with US $ 40,000 was found in Toledo, which made it suspect that he was preparing to leave the country.[157]

On July 27, 2019, Congress elected its new Board of Directors for the 2019-2020 term. He won the list headed by Pedro Olaechea, supported by Popular Force, APRA, Contigo and Change 21, who beat the list headed by Daniel Salaverry, who was seeking his reelection with the support of the other political groups. The result was 76 votes in favor of Olaechea, 47 in favor of Salaverry and 2 blank votes. Pedro Olaechea, an economist and businessman by profession, had been elected to Congress by PPK, and was also a minister in the Kuczynski government. But then it separated from its bench and promoted the creation of another, called the Parliamentary Agreement, and then started another with the name of Republican Action. Although he called himself independent, Olaechea, throughout his parliamentary career was characterized by always voting in the line of Fujimori.Accompanying him on the Board of Directors were: Karina Beteta (Popular Force) in the first vice-presidency; Salvador Heresi (Contigo) in the second vice presidency; and Marvin Palma (Change 21) in the third vice-presidency.[158]