Pedro Castillo’s lawyer points to the Inter-American Court as the former president’s last hope

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Court) is the hope of the former Peruvian president Pedro Castillo. A year after the failed coup d’état that caused him to end up in prison, his defense points to that court to correct the “irregularities” that it considers surrounding the case, as his lawyer, Eduardo Pachas, explained to EFE.

“What we are going to take to the Inter-American Court is how the authorities have violated due process and how they have conspired against President Castillo”Pachas assured EFE.

On December 7, 2022, Castillo (2021-2022) gave a speech to the nation in which he announced the closure of the Congressthe formation of an emergency Executive that was going to govern by decree and the reconfiguration of the Justice system.

READ ALSO: Pedro Castillo: PJ denied about 20 appeals presented by former president

READ ALSO: Pedro Castillo reappeared at the TC hearing and demanded that his preventive detention be suspended

But after a year serving preventive detention, he stated in a recent hearing of the Constitutional Court (TC) that his words were part of a political speech and that the plan he pronounced was not executable.

”He was the president of Peru, he had immunity and Congress had not voted for his dismissal or vacancy. Let that be clear. Therefore, when the Police detained him (…) he had immunity. “A crime has been committed against a guarantee, the right to individual liberty related to presidential immunity.”said Pachas.

At the doors of the Barbadillo prison in Lima, where Castillo He has been imprisoned for 365 days, his lawyer reports that on December 7, 2022, after carrying out the self-coup d’état and when he moved with his family to the Mexico’s embassyhe was kidnapped because “due process was not respected.”

He denies the accusations

The former president meets preventive prison for two different cases, 18 months for the alleged commission of the crime of rebellion, and on the other hand, he is serving 36 months for alleged cases of corruption and membership in a criminal organization when he held office.

”The crimes of which he is accused, rebellion and conspiracy and the crime against public order and abuse of authority, are crimes that do not occur in the facts”stated the lawyer.

Pachas reiterated that what he did Castillo was to convey a political cry of the people against the Congressthe Prosecutor’s Office and other authorities.

”One of the elements (of the crime) is taking up arms. The question is, where are the weapons? Who stood up, where is the record? Was it a military man? Was it a serenazgo (municipal agent), a rondero (member of the rural self-defense committee) or any person from the civilian population? The answer is no. Therefore, there was no executor, nor were there weapons and there was no agent to carry out the action.”he argues.

He insists that the message to the nation was “a political speech that was ineffective” because “it did not have a signature from the members of the Council of Ministers,” and in his words, in view of article 120 of the Constitution, it is “an act void and without legal effect.”

”The reading of the speech on December 7 was not a crime nor was it a constitutional violation. As I said, article 120 of the Constitution, he says, are null and void legal acts when they do not have the signature of the ministers “points out when pointing out that the person responsible for the arrest was the attorney general, Patricia Benavides.

Judicial future

This Monday, at the aforementioned hearing in the TC Several habeas corpus were supported to achieve the freedom of the former president and thus annul the 18 months of preventive detention.

During it, the lawyer explained that this judicial decision has irregularities.

”The reasons why this is abusive, contradictory in itself, lack of narrative coherence and failure to present the facts clearly have been exposed”he told EFE.

He also stated that there was no flagrante delicto and that, if there had been one, an oral trial would have already taken place. He also highlighted that there was no pertinent complaint for his arrest and that, according to the Constitution, Castillo As president he had rights that were not respected on the day of his arrest.

But he added that the TC He did not let him finish his arguments and appealed to the international community because he believes that there was “a curtailment of the right to defense.” Pachas commented that Castillo He is in good health and optimistic, but he is also aware of the reality he faces.

“We simply hope for justice”he concluded.