Reality and Truth

By: Guido Rosendo Olivera Zapata 

In Peru thanks to tapes of conversations between magistrates, politicians and third parties the reality of justice in Peru stands naked. In them you hear a magistrate of the Supreme Court of Callao speaking to another about a sentence for sexual abuse of a 13 year-old girl that had arrived at his desk. He said “I will reduce the penalty or declare him innocent”. We would like to know if this judge received money for such a sentence.

The country and the whole world is outraged by this. The defendant in question would have received a harsh sentence in a previous court, more than thirty years for the serious crime of rape against a minor. With this judge protecting the offender we must ask “what happened?” Furthermore, the judge discussed it not as rape but as a simple “deflowering.”

THE REALITY is that politicians try to deceive public opinion with double talk such as that expressed by Mrs. Keiko who denies being the Mrs. “K” mentioned in other tapes of shame. She expresses total support for President Vizcarra, when THE TRUTH is that her majority bench in the congress systematically hinders the executive. It has the with the clear intention of not letting President Vizcarra’s administration work.

Members of her party intend to take over the judiciary because many of its members, including Mrs. Keiko and her husband, are accused of money laundering. The secretary general of that party must be a magician because upon entering that political party he was merely a minibus collector; he occupied one of the lowest paid jobs and now it is one of the most prosperous and rich persons of the country almost overnight.

[mnky_ads id=”28246″]

THE TRUTH: The Fujimorist party claims judicial power by appointing judges to protect them, such as the judge who, in ten days, declared Mrs. “K” innocent of corruption.

THE REALITY of the judiciary is an open secret. It is tainted with corruption and every week people claiming justice through their litigation. THE TRUTH: nothing works within the judiciary, the Office of Control of the Magistracy (OCMA) and other control entities do not work. People call for the National Council of Magistrate to control the judges when it, as evidenced by recent events, is filled with corruption.

THE TRUTH: no agency controls the judges in Peru. They can make or take resolutions as they please, covered by rules that prescribe that the sentences issued by the judges cannot be reviewed.

The main crime committed by a judge is that of Prevaricato. Penal Code “Article 418.- Prevarication. It states that the Judge or Prosecutor who issues a decision or issues an opinion manifestly contrary to the express and clear text of the law, or cites non-existent evidence or false facts, or relies on alleged or repealed laws, shall be punished with a custodial sentence of not less than three nor more than five years.

THE TRUTH we believe that the solution starts with the creation of a constitutional court and requires the REVISION of all judgments issued by the judges of the republic on serious crimes (terrorism, hired killers, rape in all its forms, money laundering, embezzlement, murders and other ).

What do the judges do to free the corrupt from prison? They declare sentences where the defendant for corruption or another serious crime that by law must have custodial sentence, let’s say only as an example 25 years, is only given 3 years and easily obtains freedom. These criminals are in complicity with the judges and make corruption continue to grow; they have confidence that the judiciary that will leave them on the street to continue assaulting and looting the country or committing crimes so serious that they would be worthy of the worst horror movies.

After reviewing the sentence of the “tremendous judges”, this review court would determine if the judge was proper in his sentence. If not, said sentence would be corrected and the offender would have to pay a 25 year sentence. In addition, the prevaricating judge would be sanctioned with the same sentence that applies to the delinquent who was protected, that is, “the tremendous judge” must have a sentence of 25 years of punishment in jail.

THE TRUTH would be that no judge would dare to protect any type of delinquent by prevaricating because on them would fall the weight of a similar penalty to that of the offender for whom they prevaricated.

Photo reference

[mnky_ads id=”28246″]

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also
Back to top button