The bottom lineEfraín Gonzales de Olarte
On September 30, it will be remembered as the day on which the president of Peru Martín Vizcarra, interpreting the Constitution approved by the de facto government of Alberto Fujimori in 1993, dissolved the Congress of the Republic – dominated by a Fujimorist-Aprista majority – before the refusal of a trust issue he had presented. An act as bold as controversial. The decision has been supported by more than 80% of the population and the president’s popularity reached 79%. However, the former congressmen presume to ignore this measure, claiming that it was unconstitutional and that it was a coup d’etat.
The truth is that Peruvian constitutionalists and opinions in general are divided some – the majority – argue that the dissolution was constitutional and others that were not. Consequently, who could settle this interpretative controversy is the Constitutional Court (TC), responsible for ensuring the constitutionality of all public and private acts. The problem is that the TC is made up of some of the judges who openly support Fujimori as a result would not have the impartiality required in this case.However, the main issue, after all this political zafarrancho, is that President Vizcarra is committed to the fight against corruption, which in Peru has its own name: Oderbrecht, the Brazilian construction company that has operated since the beginning of this century in Peru and in other countries based on a systematic system of corruption of politicians and senior officials, to obtain bids for a large number of infrastructure works. However, the opposition to the Vizcarra government, led by fuji-aprismo, tries to get rid of its leaders and avoid justice, for which the best way was to vacate the president. It must be taken into account that the last four presidents are being investigated, prosecuted or escaped, in addition to several former authorities and senior ex-officials are also under investigation by the prosecution. Faced with these threats, Fuji-Aprismo opted to prevent the judiciary from being impartial by co-opting several judges and members, and ex-former Nation Prosecutor Pedro Chavarry was invited to influence the investigations of those accused of corruption of his friends and, as a last resort measure, they tried to choose new members of the TC to obtain rulings favorable to those investigated for corruption.
The crux of the dissolution of the congress is therefore an ethical and moral issue, which has divided Peru into two parts: On the one hand, those who in one way or another are involved in corruption, which includes Peruvian businessmen and not only to politicians, who are trying to flee from justice and those, such as President Vizcarra and a large part of citizenship, intellectuality, various media, who want the corrupt to be tried and sentenced and for Peru to recover ethics and morals and banish the corruption that Peruvian society is disintegrating. It is important to keep in mind that the process of fighting corruption is being carried out by a “special prosecutor” that has demonstrated not only moral integrity, adherence to the law, willingness to reach the culprits, but also a courage worthy of support, which It generates a founded hope to fight corruption.
Unfortunately, Peru has been included among the 50 most corrupt countries in the world, which is making us a “banana republic”, a country without a civilized future and delaying the possibilities of development. Hence the importance of the dissolution of the congress, because it amounts to dissolving a way of doing politics to favor particular interests stained by corruption.
The dissolution of the congress we hope will be the beginning of a new stage in a country whose economic stability is not consistent with its political and moral crisis. It is necessary to moralize politics and the State.
Lima, October 11, 2019