Judicial Power evaluates a lawsuit to declare the A.N.T.A.U.R.O. party illegal.

The Judiciary has taken a significant step in the fight for legality and democracy by referring a lawsuit filed by the National Prosecutor's Office to the Permanent Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court, seeking to declare the political party National Alliance of University Agricultural Workers, Reservists, and Workers, known by its acronym A.N.T.A.U.R.O., illegal. This group, which has strong ties to Antauro Humala, has come under scrutiny due to its activities, which, according to the Prosecutor's Office, violate democratic principles and affect fundamental freedoms and rights. The news was disseminated through an official statement on the social network X (formerly Twitter), where the Presidency of the Judiciary confirmed the submission of the request to the competent supreme chamber for processing. This episode marks a key moment in the political history of the country, as the A.N.T.A.U.R.O. party was registered in December 2023 with the National Jury of Elections, granting it the possibility of participating in future electoral processes. The Prosecutor's Office based its lawsuit on the provisions of Article 14 of Law No. 28094, the Law of Political Organizations. This article establishes the legal framework for the registration and operation of political organizations in Peru, and the Prosecutor's Office argues that the actions of the party in question are incompatible with this framework. In particular, the Public Ministry asserts that A.N.T.A.U.R.O. has promoted attacks against the life and integrity of individuals, including former presidents, and has fostered the exclusion and persecution of various sectors of society, such as the LGTBIQ+ community and immigrants. In light of this situation, the Prosecutor's Office has requested that the organization be prohibited from re-registration in the Register of Political Organizations, as well as in any other registry that would allow it to operate legally. Additionally, it seeks to disqualify those citizens who are part of the party's chain of command and who may be held responsible for the anti-democratic behaviors cited in the lawsuit. The case of A.N.T.A.U.R.O. is not new; the figure of Antauro Humala, the party leader, has been at the center of various political controversies. His image has been marked by his participation in controversial events, such as the "Andahuaylazo," which had a profound impact on Peruvian politics. Recently, the Judiciary rejected a motion filed by Humala seeking to annul the sentence related to this episode, reinforcing the narrative that his party continues to be a focus of controversy and public attention. The current context in which this legal process is taking place is that of a country striving to consolidate its democratic institutions after years of political instability. The lawsuit against A.N.T.A.U.R.O. presents an opportunity to reaffirm the State's commitment to defending human rights and promoting inclusive politics, in contrast to discourses that foster division and violence. The situation highlights the importance of the role of the Public Ministry in overseeing and controlling political organizations. The declaration of a party's illegality not only has repercussions for its members but also affects the electoral landscape and the citizens' right to choose and be chosen. This process will be closely monitored by both political actors and the public, who demand a firm commitment to transparency and legality. The debate over the legality of A.N.T.A.U.R.O. also invites broader reflection on the nature of democracy in Peru and the challenges faced by institutions in trying to balance freedom of expression with the protection of the rights of all citizens. The Prosecutor's lawsuit indicates that the struggle for a more robust and equitable political system remains an ongoing task. In conclusion, the future of A.N.T.A.U.R.O. is now in the hands of the Supreme Court, which must decide whether the organization meets the democratic standards required by law. The resolution of this case could set an important precedent for the management of political parties in the country and for the safeguarding of democracy in Peru. Civil society, as well as political analysts, will closely observe how this process unfolds and what implications it may have for the national political landscape.