September 29, 2023

Brighton Journal

Complete News World

Reasons for the arrest of Pedro Castillo | Comment

Reasons for the arrest of Pedro Castillo |  Comment

We are one in our America The President is a prisoner, because he is unwilling to put his signature on renewing concessions that have handed over his country’s wealth to outrageous transnational interests. That was the real reason for his imprisonment Pedro CastilloThe rest are “form”, although the “form is distorted” because they are not legal arguments. “Finance” means Fujimori’s offersExpires this year and next year.

“Clumsy form” is a collection of twisted pseudo-legal arguments of those who have united them in a whisper, in which they want to make you an accomplice with brutal racism: “This Solo cannot be president.” Because they integrated it that way President Castillo was the first farmer from the mountains, from deep and depressed Peru, González Prada, Mariadegui and Haya de la Torre drew attention several times in their history. That is why they did not hesitate to kill the seventy “solos” who protested against the abuse of their president.

As if that weren’t deviant enough, these dead are also stigmatized as “terrugos,” a derogatory term for “terrorists,” even though they have no explosives or guns and the victims include women and children. Those deaths have not gone unpunishedBut one day someone will have to pay for them, starting with Castillo’s accomplice, who betrays him and usurps the presidency, whether captured by someone or a hostage. Dominance of Congress “Fujimorismo” and 6% with a positive image. A “distorted form” attempts to derive legal definitions that fail to cover a clear violation of constitutional and international law.

First, it must be clarified that Peru has a constitution that created a mixture between presidentialism and parliamentarism, which seems to create confusion, which explains the cinematic succession of presidents. However, since the President can dissolve Congress and Congress can remove the President, outside of the constitutional presumption there is an impeachment procedure when the President seeks to dissolve Congress. This practice was not followed by the Congress, which removed him on grounds of “moral incapacity” for which he had to get many votes that he did not have, as he needed 26 votes and got only 21, but it was still there. Ignored “formality” and he was fired.

See also  The dollar today: How the market reacted after Lula's victory in Brazil

Apart from the fact that he thereby violated the Constitution (Art. 99, 100 and 117), he never listened to Castillo, ie. He was denied the right to protection This is the most basic requirement that all international jurisdictions require as a minimum in these cases of so-called “political investigations”.

In upholding Castillo’s detention, in a confusing passage, it appears to say that the denial of the right to “due process” defense is irrelevant in his case because he lacks “materiality.” “The defense, or rather, the jurors are assuming that Castillo has no defense. It’s obviously a highly incompetent piece of nonsense.

But there is another important absurdity regarding the fact that he was prosecuted: he was accused of “rebellion,” which is a crime of “taking up arms.” The actual events are as follows: On the morning that Congress was preparing to remove Castillo, he summoned his collaborators and made a speech announcing that he would dissolve Congress and call a Constituent Assembly. This text can have no other purpose than a farewell announcement indicating the future path, but Castillo knew that he had no military or police supportHe immediately went to the Mexican embassy, ​​to the extent of imprisoning him in his own custody.

Not only was there no “armed uprising,” but because no one needed to take up arms to protect Castillo, not only Castillo knew it could be nothing. Dissolve Congress. Within an hour, the heads of all uniformed officers made it clear, without dissent, that none of them had moved, as expected. Who else can expect the military to bite Castillo in official proceedings?

See also  Chile: Suicide shock of 26-year-old Patricio Bardot, who lost his eye during the crackdown on social unrest | Human rights groups have denounced the government for abandoning them

But there is more: It is a speech, not an orderNothing with the signature of its ministers, no “formality”, no expression of will and nothing else, it did not even act in the way it should be legally executed.

Well, despite all that Castillo is in jail for “taking up a weapon” when no one else was armed Everyone knows that no one will lift it. This is what is known as an “improper attempt” or “impossible crime”, that is, when seen from before the conduct, it is obvious to anyone that the means could never produce the effect. This is the case with those who want to kill with prayer, with needles in a doll or with parsley. Unlike our code, Peruvian expressly states that improper attempt is not punishable.

How do Peru’s highest judges deal with this difficulty that some consider “formal”? More curiously: they assert that Castillo’s speech would have been more dangerous “under other circumstances of time, place, and manner.” This is undoubtedly true: In Fujimori’s case in 1992, the slightly different “circumstance” involved him having the full support of armed and police forces.

Judges ignore that there is no such thing as dangerous or non-harmful behavior in some situations. It may be more general or even inappropriate: the person who, seeing his rich uncle drowning, takes up gymnastics instead of helping him, is at least guilty of abandoning a person, no doubt. death; If a hospitalist eats pizza instead of helping a heart attack patient, he is obviously failing to provide help. And doing gymnastics and eating pizza are risky or harmful behaviors in “other circumstances.”

See also  Two killed in Tonga volcano eruption and flooding of Peruvian streets (videos)

What is truly dangerous is the argument itself, because according to the criteria of these judges, any conduct can be considered harmful or dangerous because it cannot be so in circumstances other than the case. In Castillo’s worst case scenario, he can’t hide this legal idiocy that his farewell speech or declaration would apply to an impeachable felony count.

Of course, the monopoly media in Peru – as in all of our Americas – now wants to confuse everything with Castillo as “corruption” and they can turn it around and not drop a dime. However, any corruption case does not legitimize impeachment and imprisonment for something else and scandalous illegality. The “resource” is the same: Fujimori’s concessions and natural resources. You must not miss the north of the compass.