The Subcommittee on Constitutional Impeachment chaired by legislator Maria Acuña (APP) held a hearing on Constitutional Complaint 424 filed by Patricia Benavides Vargas, a former public prosecutor, against former President Martin Vizcar and former Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Ana Teresa Revilla Vergara. Both refused to answer the parliamentarians’ questions.
It should be noted that the former authorities were convicted of alleged crimes related to incompatible negotiations or improper use of office and illegal appointment; described in Articles 399 and 381 of the Penal Code, respectively, in connection with the appointment of Daniel Soria Lujan as State Attorney General.
In his defense, former President Martin Vizcarra said he did not commit any fault or crime in the appointment of Attorney General Daniel Soria, as it was at the suggestion of the Ministry of Justice.
“When I have in front of me the highest resolution to sign, I note that it is approved by the head of the legal department of Minjus, Juana Jimena Niu Cáceres del Busta, that even in 2022 she was investigated by the Ministry of Justice, which determines that he did not violate “any internal procedures” , he claimed.
Vizcarra exercised his right to remain silent and did not answer the various questions asked by the congressional delegate on the constitutional complaint against him, Victor Flores Ruiz (FP). This position was taken after Congressman Elvis Vergara (AP) presented a preliminary question to the subcommittee to decide whether or not to accept the resignation of Martin Vizcar in the preliminary political process.
In this regard, with 4 votes “for”, 10 “against” and 3 “abstentions”, the subcommittee decided not to accept his resignation. After that, the ex-president decided to leave the meeting in order not to answer the parliamentarians’ questions anymore.
In turn, the former Minister of Justice assured that the crime she is accused of, in connection with the alleged illegal appointment, is long overdue. He assured that the highest resolution meets the legal requirements for the appointment of Daniel Soria as the state attorney general and that he is not interested in his appointment.
At the meeting, Revilla also waived the preliminary trial and used the right to remain silent in order not to answer parliamentarians’ questions about Soria’s appointment.
RIGHT
According to the constitutional complaint, a few days before the issuance of Supreme Resolution 01-2020-JUS appointing Daniel Soria as State Attorney General, the Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, Carlos Alberto Cavagnaro Pizarro, issued to the then Technical Secretary of the State Council for Legal Protection, Martin Jim Mizhichichu Loli file that contained documented resumes of Soria Lujan to review the documentation and prepare a draft of the supreme ruling.
With regard to the requirement of experience in state legal protection, it was stated that Soria Luhan was an adviser to the first deputy on constitutional issues of the office of the ombudsman, but no functions related to state legal protection were described. Despite this, Vizcarra appointed him to the position without taking into account the provisions of paragraph 8 of article 15.1 of Legislative Decree 1326, which establishes as one of the requirements professional suitability and experience in management or public policy, in addition to a trajectory in the legal protection of the state.
The Institutional Review Body of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights subsequently issued the following Official Action Report 002-2022-OCl/0281-A0P dated January 31, 2022, which concluded that: “they were alerted to indications of violations that would affect the process of appointing the Attorney General.” Similarly, in its analytical part, it is noted that “it was established that Mr. Daniel Soria Lujan was appointed as the State Attorney General without meeting the requirements of having experience in the legal defense of the State.”
HEARING DISCONTINUED
On another occasion, the subcommittee decided to suspend the constitutional complaint No. 050 (formerly 385) filed by citizen Victor Jorge Pérez Arteaga against the accused Carlos Moran Soto in his capacity as Minister of the Interior.
Neither the former minister nor the witnesses were present in this case. The hearing was adjourned due to the absence of complaint delegate Francis Paredes Castro (PP).
OFFICE OF COMMUNICATION AND IMAGE OF THE INSTITUTION