Debate on control of criminal investigations amid a crisis of trust in Peru.

In the midst of a climate of growing insecurity and distrust in the country's institutions, the debate over the control of criminal investigations has taken a new turn. Recently, an intense exchange of opinions has arisen following the presentation of a bill aimed at amending the Criminal Procedure Code, with the intention of strengthening the role of the National Police of Peru (PNP) in investigating crimes. However, this bill has faced severe criticism, primarily for its apparent intention to concentrate investigative power in the Executive Branch, which has raised alarms about the separation of powers and judicial independence. Juan Carlos Villena, a prominent critic of the measure, has described the initiative as unconstitutional, warning that its aim is to place all investigations under the direct control of the Ministry of the Interior. According to him, this situation would erode the autonomy of the judicial system and compromise the impartiality of investigations. The Board of Supreme Prosecutors, an organization that brings together the highest representatives of the Public Ministry, has expressed its opposition to this measure, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a clear division between the powers of the State. The Board, which meets under the presidency of the Attorney General, has voiced its concern over the lack of quorum in its recent statement, as only four of the six supreme prosecutors attended the meeting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of its position. This fact has led some critics to question the credibility and competence of its members, suggesting that the lack of unity and the presence of questions about their suitability affect the effectiveness of the justice system in the country. In an environment where violence and crime seem to have outpaced the State, the proposal to strengthen the capabilities of the PNP has been met with skepticism. Many citizens and analysts argue that, far from resolving the problem, this measure could perpetuate the corruption and impunity that already affect law enforcement. Recent history has shown that at times, those tasked with protecting citizens have been involved in criminal acts, generating distrust and division among the population. Criticism is not limited to the judicial sphere, but also extends to the Congress of the Republic, which many citizens accuse of being an obstacle to necessary reforms. The lack of action and the ineffectiveness of some legislators have contributed to the perception of a system in crisis, where institutions seem to be in a constant struggle for control and legitimacy. Questions about the quality of public officials and their commitment to justice are a constant in current political discourse. Some analysts propose the hypothesis that, instead of fostering inter-institutional collaboration, a climate of distrust and suspicion has been established among the various entities of the State. This distrust is fueled by the perception that certain prosecutors and members of the judiciary have made decisions that benefit criminals and favor impunity. This has led to a critical analysis of the Board of Prosecutors' ability to act as a true bastion of justice in the country. The question many are asking is whether this reform will truly be the solution to the security and corruption problems facing Peru. The concentration of power in a single body, such as the Executive, could lead to abuses and a lack of accountability. In a democratic system, the independence of each power and agency is crucial to ensuring that the rights of all citizens are respected and that equitable access to justice is guaranteed. In this context, the possibility of the PNP assuming a predominant role in investigations, to the detriment of the Public Ministry, has opened a debate about the future of the rule of law in the country. History has shown that concentrations of power often lead to abuses and violations of rights. Concerns about how these measures could impact the fight against corruption and the protection of human rights are valid and must be addressed seriously. Citizens play a fundamental role in this discussion. It is imperative that transparency and accountability are demanded from all actors involved in the justice system. The active participation of civil society and constant pressure on legislators and public officials are essential to maintaining the integrity of the State and ensuring that the proposed reforms truly respond to the needs of the population. The fight for a safer and fairer Peru continues, and it will depend on collective will and commitment to democracy and the fundamental values that underpin society.