Prosecutors raid homes of TV host and possible accomplices in Peru

Lima. On Tuesday, teams of Peruvian prosecutors raided the homes of television host Andrés Hurtado and two others involved in a complex corruption scheme of such scope that they are the subject of an investigation.

The operation, which aims to find possible evidence, did not require police support, as is usual, and began with raids on a house and apartment of prosecutor Elizabeth Peralta, who is being investigated for favoring those recommended by Hurtado in exchange for money.

Peralta granted access to the prosecutors, one of whom briefly stated that the investigation was proceeding without any problems, although he declined to give details due to the confidential nature of the investigation.

Two homes belonging to mining entrepreneur Augusto Miu Lei were also raided, one in the northern city of Piura and another in Lima.

Miu Lei is part of a dispute between two groups of brothers dedicated to the gold trade, a dispute that sparked a scandal when both factions accused each other of paying Hurtado to benefit from his influence.

The web of relationships between Hurtado, who is under arrest and under investigation for alleged crimes of influence peddling, bribery and others, was built through exchanges of favors, such as the organization of the Judge’s Day party at the Superior Court of Justice of Lima, as a kind of gift to the head of the court, María Vidal.

An investigation is also planned for the remodeling, by Hurtado, of the apartment of Judge Paola Valdivia, a member of the Lima Court of Appeals for Corruption and Organized Crime cases.

On the other hand, the Prosecutor’s Office in charge of the case issued a statement in which it “deeply deplores” that the Judiciary reported on the raids before they began, which, it claims, “severely harms the effectiveness of justice,” which the Judiciary denied.

For its part, the army, in a message on the X network, revoked the Medal of the Peruvian Army, awarded to Andrés Hurtado in January 2016, for having “contributed to the achievement of institutional objectives with his professional work.”

The award, the most important one awarded to civilians, was withdrawn, he added, because the person violated “the ethical and moral values ​​that govern the conduct of every citizen who bears this distinction.”