Pedro Castillo: INPE’s contradictions over the former president’s son-in-law going to prison | principle

visits Gian Marco Castillo Gomez Evidence of the lack of coordination between the Department of Justice (PJ) and the National Penitentiary Institute (INPE) at the Barbadillo prison, at his uncle, former President Pedro Castillo.

This Wednesday, August 16, the president of INPE, Javier Llaque, in a conversation with Canal N, said that the son-in-law of the former head of state was barred from entering the prison. As pointed out, this was because they were not notified by the judiciary of this provision.

The Department of Justice denied that it had any duty to notify the defendants of the restrictive measures and said that it was the responsibility of the Public Ministry to take action in the matter.

Read more | Pedro Castillo: Who are the other congressmen included in the criminal framework?

When Castillo Gomez asked if INPE would allow him to visit his uncle in the future. Locke answered “No” because “it is already a public and infamous fact” and in such cases, they act as the “leading authority”.

“They did not inform us about this case and we do not know if there are other cases. That is why if there are many cases where visits are prohibited, we call pointing out who they are. We will take immediate action. On the 4th of July they told us that Mr. [Henry] Shimabukuro did not enter, and on July 4th he remained at the door and did not enter”. revealed.

The President of INPE noted that the Department of Justice is responsible for the income of Castillo Gomez to Barbadillo prison. He pointed out that restrictions were not announced in this case alone.

A few hours ago, in a conversation with the RPP, he indicated that – initially, when the decision on Pedro Castillo’s detention reached them – Barbadillo was the only co-defendant prevented from entering the prison, Anibal Torres. Both are being investigated in connection with the December 7 coup.

Likewise, Locke urged “those charged with process and jurisdiction” to inform not only detention centers but also restrictions.

The explanation given by the president of INPE contradicts the statement issued by the agency on Monday, August 14, in which Gian Marco Castillo Gómez said there was no obstacle to visit his uncle in Barbadillo.

Read more | He was sacked as a judge and condemned for allegedly enriching the new chairman of the Education Commission.

In a statement, the Justice Department indicated that Castillo Gomez was “notified” by his attorney and the prosecutor’s office and his co-investigators of the order to appear with restrictions and rules of conduct.

“In this regard, compliance with the Code of Conduct is the strict responsibility of every defendant, and in case of non-compliance, the Public Ministry is empowered by the Penal Code to encourage its withdrawal.” Mentioned.

“Unlike pre-trial detention, release orders or other similar communications, there are no authoritative rules to guide the courts in their conduct,” the PJ asserted.

“Therefore, it is not the responsibility of this judicial authority to inform the National Penitentiary Institute (INPE) or the National Police about the code of conduct of any defendant.” was added.

It also pointed out that “the public prosecutor’s office is the agency to take action” in case of non-compliance with the code of conduct.

“If the Public Ministry deems it appropriate to extend the scope of the restrictions imposed on the accused Castillo Gomez […] You must properly confirm your request, so that in the respective hearing, the judge of the case resolves the appropriate and fulfills the request to the recently related companies. came to an end.

Read more | Pedro Castillo: The head of INPE says the Justice Department did not announce the restrictions on his visits

Congressman Hector Ventura (Popular Force) added to the accusation of the head of INPE, confirming that Castillo Terrones is visited “constantly” by his son-in-law in Barbadillo, despite the ban of the judiciary.

Congressman Fujimori thus referred to the resolution of May 6, 2022, in which the PJ issued an appearance with restrictions against Gian Marco Castillo Gómez instead of detention and established the code of conduct to be followed by the son-in-law of the former president. Among them, he was prohibited from communicating with his co-investigators and witnesses.

In the same document, the Department of Justice ordered 24 months of detention against Victor Elfren Valdivia Malpartida, Edgar William Vargas Mas, Luis Carlos Elias Pasabera Adriansen, Jamir Villaverde Garcia, Bruno Pacheco Castillo and Fray Vatilosquez.

Before the PJ’s decision, Castillo Gómez had an arrest warrant for which he absconded from the end of March 2022, along with his cousin Fray Vasquez Castillo, whose whereabouts are unknown to date.

Both the nephews and the aforementioned other characters are being investigated for the Puente Tarata III case. At the end of February 2022, in his reports as a curious and efficient collaborator, Carrelim Lopez implicated them in the alleged mafia within the MTC, which would have been headed by ex-president Pedro Castillo Terones.

“I know there is a mafia in the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC), President Pedro Castillo Terones (…) The President’s nephews: Fray Vasquez Castillo, Gian Marco Castillo Gómez, Roosevelt [Rudbel] hidden walls [sobrino por el lado de su esposa]”, He said.

Last Monday, August 14, the Fuerza Popular congressman asked INPE for information on the visits Castillo Terrones received this year. However, your request has not yet been processed.

A day earlier, the “Cuarto Poder” revealed that his son-in-law had met the former president on July 25.

When PJ asked through the Sunday program about the restrictions imposed on him, Gian Marco Castillo Gómez replied that the only rule they imposed was to attend the summons.

Read more | Peru Libre Uses Congressional Facilities for Party Events Again: Is There an Ethical Breach?

Also born in Tacabamba is Gian Marco, the son of Jose Castillo Terrones, brother of the former president, who is now 24 years old.

He was very close to his uncle during the 2021 election campaign. After the election victory, he shared videos of a ceremony on social networks. Presentation of Credentials to Pedro Castillo President and accompanied him to the Government Palace for the aforementioned meeting with Francisco Sagasti.

opportunities

In a conversation with El Comercio, former Deputy Minister of Justice Gilmer Andia and former lawyer Victor Cubas pointed out that it is the responsibility of the Public Ministry to correct this situation by requesting from the Department of Justice that the restricted appearance of Gian Marco Castillo be varied. Prevention is through prevention.

Andia pointed out that when requesting the request against Castillo Gomez, the National Prosecutor’s Office should have warned that there was a file against the former head of state in the same case, but that he was not prosecuted together with his son-in-law and other characters. It is about a ranking officer.

However, he pointed out that the situation could have been clarified in a judicial inquiry by asking the prosecutor’s office about the case.

According to the former deputy minister, “even if it is not directly mentioned, it should be understood that this restriction also applies to Pedro Castillo, because he is a co-defendant in another level of prosecution due to his special status in a high position. – Ranking officer.”

To resolve this situation, Andia opined that the Public Ministry should “immediately” request the Judiciary to remand Castillo Gomez’s appearance in pre-trial detention so that the case can be reassessed.

“This is a perfect situation to review this situation. This is a perfect opportunity to fix it […] It is not INPE that has to carry out the mandate [de restricciones]It corresponds to the Public Ministry to verify compliance with the code of conductThe former justice minister warned.

Read more | “Organized crime is coming to threaten democratic institutions”

Former attorney Victor Cubas had a similar opinion. And, “The responsibility of the prosecuting attorney is to be diligent in seeing that his process is carried out in the best possible manner and that it is free from contamination and tampering with evidence. The function is not exercised.”

“The responsibility is clearly the public ministry,[hecouldhaveappealedthatthebantomeetwithCastillobewaivedbutitshouldbeamended”[elimpedimentodevisitaraCastillopodríahaberpresentadounrecursosolicitandoquesehagalacorreccióncorrespondiente”[காஸ்டிலோவைசந்திப்பதற்கானதடைதவிர்க்கப்பட்டிருந்தாலும்அதற்கானதிருத்தம்செய்யப்படவேண்டும்என்றுஅவர்மேல்முறையீடுசெய்திருக்கலாம்”[elimpedimentodevisitaraCastillopodríahaberpresentadounrecursosolicitandoquesehagalacorreccióncorrespondiente”pointed out.

Read more | Alejandro Soto: The company is suing him and seeking civil damages for damages

In early May 2022, a few days before the Department of Justice issued its embargoed appearance against Gian Marco Castillo, then-National Prosecutor Zoraida Avalos opened two preliminary investigations into former President Pedro Castillo, one of which was related. The case of Puente Tarata. However, he put it on hold till the end of his tenure.

A few days later, Avalos’ interim successor, Pablo Sánchez, decided not to suspend the investigation but to move forward given the seriousness of the allegations.

The financial thesis is that the president has led a mafia into the executive branch that favors the businessmen who supported his presidential campaign. It would have had operators such as former minister Juan Silva Juan Silva, Bruno Pacheco, Jamir Villaverde and his nephews.