Peruvian President Pedro Castillo announced on Wednesday that he had approached the Organization of American States to seek support for democracy and to curb what he described as constitutional corruption in the country. The prosecution, meanwhile, insisted that the ongoing investigation respected the rights of those involved.
In a nationwide address shortly after 9 p.m. local time, Castillo spoke of what he called a hidden plot that aims to destabilize Peru’s constitutional and democratic order. He pointed fingers at segments of the political opposition, the judiciary, and the press, alleging that they are backing a new coup intended to remove him from office. He claimed that his family and his government have been subjected to political persecution since he took office in July 2021, with critics branding him in turn as a communist and then as a terrorist, and now accusing him of pursuing a strategy to tarnish the presidency’s image.
go to OAS
The president argued that his decision to consult the Organization of American States was a precautionary move to defend democracy and to prevent constitutional degradation. He urged that the appeal address acts that threaten democratic institutions, the rule of law, and the country’s economic development, invoking Articles 17 and 18 of the Americas Democratic Charter. He added that his action was taken to strengthen democratic resilience rather than to pursue any personal vendetta.
Castillo’s request to the OAS was formalized in a letter delivered to Congress on October 12 by the national attorney general. The attorney general’s constitutional complaint against the president has been described by Castillo as unconstitutional, illegal, and baseless. The document accuses him of leading a corrupt network seeking to rig contracts for public works to extract illegal profits, and it alleges involvement in criminal organization offenses, including influence peddling and collusion in relation to public administration.
The Executive Branch and Castillo’s defense maintain that Article 117 of the Constitution restricts presidential charges to four specific scenarios that relate to the performance of duties, such as treason or election interference. They argue that ordinary crimes like corruption fall outside that framework and cannot, by themselves, remove a sitting president from office.
The prosecution argues
On the other side, prosecutors insist they are fully protecting fundamental rights during the preliminary investigation that led to today’s constitutional complaint. In a briefing with international media stationed in Peru, Deputy Attorney General Marco Huamán stated that the complaint includes more than 190 items of evidence supporting the charge that Castillo has led a criminal organization. He emphasized that the case is being handled with rigorous regard for due process and that the investigation remains within the proper legal channels.
Huamán, who coordinates the Specialized Office for Constitutional Complaints, noted that even as the attorney general reiterated that the complaint stems from pretrial steps, the law does not authorize prosecutors to advance the activities outside the scope set by the judicial process. He stressed that the final decision rests with Congress, while acknowledging that the procedures themselves reveal the careful balance courts seek in such matters.
The complaint now moves to the Parliament’s Subcommittee on Constitutional Accusations, which has sought guidance from the Constitutional Court to interpret the nation’s Magna Carta. The goal is to determine whether the charges against the president can proceed and, if so, how they should be adjudicated within the constitutional framework.