Peru’s national Jury of Elections rejects justice and accepts fraud

(Interamerican Institute for Democracy) To confirm that in Peru crimes committed in the second round of presidential elections are covered-up and that those elections were neither free, nor fair, it is enough to read the resolutions and rulings issued by the National Jury of Elections (JNE in Spanish) rejecting the invalidity of votes cast at voting precincts where, as formally exposed and proven, there was “counterfeiting of signatures” of alleged voters. Using the argument that counterfeiting of signatures is not under their purview and asking that this matter be sent to a penal legal process, the maximum electoral authorities reject justice and accept the fraud for the final vote count.

Ever since the past 6th of June, a date in which the second round of presidential elections took place to elect the President of Peru between candidates Pedro Castillo and Keiko Fujimori, information released indicated an initial advantage of Fujimori over Castillo and after a final vote count mired by challenges and denouncements gave 8,836,293 votes for Castillo and 8,792,117 votes for Fujimori. A meager difference of 44,176 votes in relationship to the 18,713,454 voters in the second round.

The 10th of June INFOBAE reported that Keiko Fujimori’s team challenged 200,500 votes and sought the “invalidation of 802 voter precinct registries due to the presumed counterfeiting of signatures, incorrect addition of votes, or missing data” and it registered photographs taken of the infested documentation.

While the legal process continues there is no winning candidate and the President-Elect of Peru has not been designated. Confrontations are on the rise and the transnational meddling of 21st Century Socialism or Castrochavism through open actions of the Forum of Sao Paolo, congratulatory statements officially congratulating Pedro Castillo as the President-Elect by the presidents of Argentina and Bolivia, has been evident, and so are the actions of Evo Morales and more.

They have developed the narrative that “Castillo won” and that “there is no proof of electoral fraud”. The rejection of fraud has been based on partial aspects of the preliminary report from the OAS’ Observer Team that stated to “not have found serious irregularities”. The argument that “there is no proof of electoral fraud” is based on pronouncements by the United States recognizing Peru as “a model of democracy in the region”, and Canadian statements stating that the second round of elections was “free, fair, and open” and the European Union’s declaration that “the 6 June electoral process has been free and democratic”.

The Public Ministry’s representative at the JNE Luis Arce Cordova resigned from this institution indicating that his decision to resign seeks to avoid his position and his vote “to be used to validate false constitutional deliberations” at the electoral office. Following his resignation, a campaign accusing him of corruption, peddling of influence and illicit enrichment, was unleashed against him.

Article 176 of Peru’s constitution states “the electoral system has as its objective to ensure that votes translate the authentic, free, and spontaneous expression of the citizenry; and the counting of votes must be an exact and timely reflection of the voter’s will expressed at the ballot box through their direct vote”, Article 1 of the Organic Law establishing the JNE determines that “the National Jury of Elections (JNE in Spanish) is the government agency . . . responsible to administer justice in electoral matters; to oversee the legality of the execution of all voting . . .”

The several rulings the Peruvian JNE has issued, in their 12-page average, have the same basis for each and every one, and are signed by magistrates Salas Arenas, Sanjinez Salazar, and Rodriguez Velez, plus 4 pages of the minority, or dissenting vote of magistrate Arce Cordova.

In Resolution JNE-0698-2021 a determination is established that is repeated in all resolutions dealing with the counterfeiting of signatures. Section 3.11 states; “Regarding a claim that there are counterfeited signatures of the president and secretary of a previously identified voting precinct, and a subject-matter expert’s report corroborating such claim has been submitted by the appealing political organization, it must be made clear that we would find ourselves facing the commission of a punishable illegal crime, therefore and in accordance with the attributions established in the Constitution and the JNE’s Legal Charter, this Electoral Supreme Tribunal has no competence to judge such an action reason why it merits to send the aforementioned report and all pertinent documentation to the titular of penal procedures, that is to say; to the Public Ministry. . .”

Complaints of the counterfeiting of signatures in voting records, in elections, is an electoral matter. To reject to consider subject-matter expert’s reports corroborating the counterfeiting of signatures is to reject justice and in Article 422 of Peru’s Penal Code this is considered as “rejecting to administer justice” because the resolution of such illicit act is “being evaded” with the alibi of transferring the counterfeiting to an ordinary legal process that, when completed, will not have any value or effect because it will take years to complete. Meanwhile, however, the counterfeited voting records are legal and maintain the numbers of votes reported by fraudulently signed reports to proclaim the President.

Neither the content, nor the decisions of the JNE have any logic or legal sense, these can be identified as prevarication since they do not guarantee or ensure that “elections to be free and fair”. These are proof of the urgent need of an audit of Peru’s electoral process that the very own JNE should ask for.

*Attorney & Political Scientist. Director of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy.
www.carlossanchezberzain.com

Translated from Spanish by; Edgar L. Terrazas, member of the American Translators Association, ATA # 234680.