Pedro Castillo: Judiciary rejected habeas corpus against complaint of treason

The Judiciary (PJ) decided to declare the habeas corpus claim filed by the President Pedro Castillo against the Subcommittee on Constitutional Accusations. What was sought with this remedy was to declare the admission of the constitutional complaint against him for alleged treason of the country null and void.

The decision was taken in the first instance by the Ninth Specialized Constitutional Court, led by Judge Juan Fidel Torres Tasso. The judge assessed that, although the president's lawyer claimed that Pedro Castillo's presumption of innocence and freedom of expression had been violated, the admission of the constitutional complaint respected legal procedures.

“(The decision) is given within the framework of the functions of political control established in the Political Constitution of the State for the Legislative Power and respect for the parameters that are appropriate to the political control of those who matter to the public interest”, the judicial decision reads.

This resolution was issued on April 8 and details that, since it is still waiting for the determined steps of the complaint to be carried out in the Standing Committee, the investigation in the Sub-Commission and subsequently in the full legislative branch, the rights of the head of state have not been affected.

“There is no certain and imminent threat of infringement of constitutional rights to Due Process, the principle of legality, or the right to the defense of rights related to individual freedom,” Judge Torres determined.

WHAT DID HABEAS CORPUS ARGUE?

The document had been presented by the president's lawyer, Eduardo Pachas, who indicated that the appeal was directed against the members of the parliamentary subcommittee “for alleged violation of the right to individual liberty”, due process, the principles of legality and inapplicability of criminal law and violation of the presumption of innocence and freedom of conscience.

It is recalled that on 28 February, the working group approved the report on the qualification of the complaint against the president for alleged treason. It was presented following the statements Castillo gave at the end of January to CNN en Español, where he said he was in favor of giving an outlet to the sea to Bolivia.

In this regard, counsel pointed out that testifying before a media outlet does not mean undermining “the integrity of the nation”, as established by the crime of treason. In addition, he pointed out that Castillo had said, in the interview, that “it was not [his] intention” when he touched on the subject.

“In other words, they do not threaten the legal good, national sovereignty, since Bolivia is not being given a way out to the sea nor is it being given sovereignty of Peruvian sea [...] Mr. Constitutional Judge, these words could never constitute the crime of treason. Since the favored one himself pointed out is not my intention,” says lee in the habeas corpus.

It also points out that Pedro Castillo “is not a military or police officer in activity, therefore, he does not and cannot commit the crime of treason of the country by the code of military justice”. It adds that the Sub-Commission acted with “the intention of understanding it within the scope of the Code of Military Police Justice” and thus “has diverted the pre-established procedure for military and police personnel, to a civilian person” through a “prohibited interpretation”.

KEEP READING