In the middle of a institutional crisis in the Public Ministryan official letter attributed to the presidents of the Boards of Provincial Prosecutors was distributed in which they request the Board of Supreme Prosecutors (JFS) for an extraordinary review of the election process for the National Prosecutor. The request was presented in response to the prolonged internal dispute over the return of Delia Espinoza.
The document, released publicly, argues that the Public Ministry requires “a management policy sustained over time” and stable leadership to confront citizen insecurity and strengthen institutional autonomy. Nevertheless, Its application could be a dangerous and unconstitutional precedent.
consulted by Infobaethe congresswoman and former prosecutor of the Nation Gladys Echaíz explained that this type of requests are not compatible with current legislation. Although he recognized the right of provincial prosecutors to issue recommendations and that the JFS could evaluate them, he warned that institutional history does not record precedents where a mandate has been terminated in this way.
“Suggestions have always been accepted, especially in view of the situation in which the Public Ministry is and which worries everyone, but the period is three years. It has never been seen and it would be very difficult to terminate a mandate as a result of these situations. It would be a constitutional violation because the term is three years and it cannot be terminated for one reason or another of this nature,” he stated.
The parliamentarian recalled that situations linked to institutional attitudes and behavior are the responsibility of the National Board of Justice (JNJ), an organization that currently has prosecutor Delia Espinoza suspended from her duties. despite the court order to replace it.
“I think that The correct thing would be to wait for the decision of the JNJ to avoid further complications or setting a precedent that is not good for anyone. Furthermore, it is not foreseen either in the law or in the Constitution that a mandate can be terminated in the face of dysfunctional situations of the institution,” he said.
Asked about the recent judicial ruling of the Ninth Constitutional Court of Lima ordering the reinstatement of Espinoza, Echaíz remarked that such measure “must be reviewed and we have to wait for what the superior decides, because he can revoke it.” Asked about the relevance of a jurisdictional claim, she considered that Eventually the issue will be raised to the Constitutional Courtbut he called to “be respectful of the constitutional order.”
“It is a guarantee action that will necessarily end up in the Constitutional Court, whether by one party or the other. And there the TC will have the opportunity to resolve it, but the Judiciary has not ruled in the final instance and in a substantive ruling”, he mentioned.
Although he agreed with some critics of the judicial actions, arguing that some judges “are contravening the constitutional text and their own organic law and all current regulations,” he insisted on the importance of acting in accordance with the constitutional framework and wait for the pronouncement of the corresponding authorities.
