New judicial setback for Keiko Fujimori in her money laundering case.

The recent ruling by the Third National Collegiate Criminal Court has marked a new chapter in the litigation involving Peruvian opposition leader Keiko Fujimori. In a decision that has generated significant repercussions, the court ordered that all actions related to the crime of obstruction of justice in the money laundering trial facing Fujimori and approximately 40 co-defendants be annulled. This ruling creates a complicated scenario for both Fujimori's defense and the future of the judicial process. The news was confirmed by the Judiciary through its official account on the social network X, where it was specified that the previous procedural acts cited in the oral trial are annulled. However, despite this decision, the court has determined that Fujimori, along with other former members of her campaign team and advisors, will continue to be tried for money laundering and other serious crimes. The development of Monday's hearing, where attorney Arsenio Oré's request to be excluded from the crime of obstruction of justice was debated, resulted in a denial from the court. This fact has prompted various reactions from those involved and their defenders, who were hoping for a more favorable decision. Fujimori's defense and that of other defendants had also requested the annulment of the charge of criminal organization, but this request was dismissed. Fujimori, who has repeatedly denied the accusations of money laundering, has insisted on her innocence. In previous hearings, the former presidential candidate argued that the allegations against her are based on illegal contributions that, according to her, she never received. In particular, she referred to statements made by Marcelo Odebrecht, who allegedly claimed not to know her, and former Odebrecht director in Peru, Jorge Barata, who stated that he had never met with her. Prosecutor José Domingo Pérez has been a key player in this process, maintaining that the Fuerza Popular party was founded not only for political purposes but also to ensure the impunity of its members linked to the criminal organization under investigation. During the presentation of his accusation, Pérez requested nothing less than 30 years in prison for Fujimori, accusing her of leading a structure that, in his view, has been involved in criminal acts. Fujimori's legal situation not only reflects a judicial problem but also has political implications in a country where polarization and distrust in institutions are palpable. Her figure has been contentious for years, with her supporters defending her legacy and her opponents denouncing alleged irregularities and corruption. The prolongation of this trial and the various judicial decisions create an atmosphere of uncertainty and expectation within the political community and among the Peruvian public. Observers and analysts wonder what the impact of these rulings will be on Fujimori's political future, as she has been a central figure in Peruvian politics for over a decade. The case unfolds in an electoral context in the country, where political tensions are exacerbated and public opinion remains divided regarding the legitimacy and transparency of the political system. The court's decisions not only affect those directly involved but also send a message about the fight against corruption and the use of justice as a tool in the political arena. With the annulment of the procedural acts for obstruction of justice, a new chapter opens in this complex judicial entanglement. However, the fight for truth and justice continues, and the outcome of this case could be a determining factor in the future of Peruvian politics. The expectations of citizens regarding the impartiality of the judicial system and its ability to address these corruption cases become a central concern at this crossroads.