It was in May 2023, when Congressman Jorge Montoya, a retired right-wing admiral, filed a constitutional complaint against the National Board of Justice (JNJ) for allegedly having improperly favored one of its members. The serious offense in question: guaranteeing that Judge Inés Tello continues to be part of the institution despite being over 75 years old (in September she will turn 79 years old). The axis of the controversy in all these months has been that: while one side points out, with the Constitution in hand, that this is the age limit to join the Board and that its violation is a serious cause that warrants a disqualification for ten years from holding public office, the other side argues that said condition was valid only when assuming office but not to exercise it and that behind this regulatoryism, other interests are actually hidden.
“I share the concern expressed by many regarding the persistent efforts to remove the JNJ (…) An independent administration of justice is the first line of protection of the human rights of all and guarantees the right to demand justice. Respecting the rule of law and promoting the separation of powers and the independence of justice are essential requirements for the protection of human rights and democracy,” said Margaret Satterthwaite, special rapporteur of the United Nations (UN) on the case. The National Board of Justice is responsible for appointing, sanctioning and ratifying the country's judges and prosecutors, as well as its electoral authorities. It is, therefore, a vital entity and, therefore, coveted by various political forces that strive to have some degree of influence.
This Thursday, March 7, after passing the corresponding instances, the final report that proposes the disqualification of the members of the Board will be submitted to the plenary session of Congress. The vote of two-thirds of the 130 legislators is required, not counting the 30 members of the Permanent Commission. In other words, the vote of 66 parliamentarians will be enough. The vote will be individual for each of the accused magistrates. Although the Board is made up of seven members, only six will be tried, since lawyer Marco Tulio Falconí Picardo only took up his duties in the middle of the week. Added to this is the resignation of Henry Ávila, mired in an alleged request for favors from the former Minister of Justice, Félix Chero, during the government of Pedro Castillo.
He is not the only one questioned in the group. Judge Guillermo Thornberry is accused of having favored Patricia Benavides, the suspended Attorney General, to obtain the top position in the Public Ministry by leaking information about the contest to her and, in addition, giving her a high rating in the personal interview. item that represented 30% of the final score. Benavides is accused of leading a criminal organization that played tricks with various Congressional groups: she freed them from their tax processes in exchange for votes that would keep her in power.
Beyond these issues that cast a shadow over some magistrates and, of course, affect the National Board of Justice, the reasons for seeking the removal of its members would have more motivations than enforcing the Magna Carta. The pre-electoral context of 2026 is a fundamental detail in the analysis. A column by Congressman Carlos Anderson in the newspaper El Comercio sheds light: “They need to ensure that key entities such as ONPE (National Office of Electoral Processes) and Reniec (National Registry of Identification and Civil Status) do not fall into the hands of “ €˜reds and caviars'. A second objective is to have some level of influence in the appointment of judges and prosecutors when the vast majority of their political party leaders face trials for corruption, illicit enrichment or for forming a criminal organization. The dismissal of the JNJ is not an end in itself, but rather the mechanism by which they must respond to their own unspeakable ends,” argues Anderson. To cite one case, in July the trial will begin against Keiko Fujimori, leader of Fuerza Popular, for allegedly having laundered 17 million dollars, coming from the construction company Odebrecht. 30 years in prison have been requested for the daughter of the patriarch Fujimori.
Judge Imelda Tumialán, member of the National Board of Justice, warns that if the disqualification is successful, it would ultimately benefit the judges and prosecutors who are under the scrutiny of the institution. “There are approximately 70 disciplinary processes in which there would be serious offenses that would remain unpunished, since with the passage of time they will expire and they could not be sanctioned. The substitutes could see it, but until they take over and resume the cases it takes time, so they would simply expire,†she questions.
For his part, the vice president of the Board, Aldo Vásquez, has emphasized that “the JNJ would be blocked from fulfilling its constitutional functions,” since only three of the six substitute magistrates meet the requirement of having up to 75 years to take office. Along with Marco Tulio Falconà Picardo, there would be four members, without a casting vote. “In order for the Board to operate, it requires a quorum of five members. If there is not, absolutely no decision can be made regarding selection and appointment, ratification of judges and prosecutors, ratification or not of the heads of ONPE and Reniec, no. A competition can be called for holders of ONPE and Reniec, decisions cannot be made on any disciplinary procedure, thereby generating – in cases where there could be disciplinary responsibility – impunity, explains Vásquez.
Meanwhile, Congressman Jorge Montoya, promoter of the motion, insists: “It is imperative to proceed with the renewal of a court that was originally established to supervise and supervise judges whose performance has been poorly questionable, who have transgressed the constitution.” and they have assumed an untouchable attitude.” In that sense, legislator Gladys Echaíz is unaware that the disqualification of the members of the JNJ is a blow to democracy. “I think things are being magnified and that the impact on democracy is a sensationalist argument to justify or pretend not to be investigated, not to be held accountable for the acts,†she says.
Created in 2018, after the deactivation of the National Council of the Judiciary, the National Board of Justice had the majority support of the groups that today have their removal in their hands, and was ratified by 86% of Peruvians through a referendum. ndum. Next Thursday we will know the results of the negotiations in the halls of Congress.
Follow all the information from El PAÍS América in Facebook y Xor in our newsletter semanal.