Sada Goray reveals bribery in Congress that implicates Castillo and his government.

In a recent interview with the program Cuarto Poder, businesswoman Sada Goray has made serious accusations that shake the Peruvian political sphere. According to her statements, some congress members, including members of the group known as the "Niños" and specifically legislator Darwin Espinoza, allegedly received bribes of up to S/ 50,000 to vote against the vacancy of then-President Pedro Castillo. Such revelations, which involve not only political figures but also high-ranking state officials, raise serious doubts about the integrity of the political process in the country. Goray, who previously held the status of an effective collaborator, claims that the money used for these bribes was managed by Salatiel Marrufo, a former advisor to the Ministry of Housing. According to her account, Marrufo acted as an intermediary between the Executive and Congress, and all of this was supposedly carried out with the knowledge and approval of President Castillo. These allegations, while needing thorough investigation, hint at possible connections between the Executive and Legislative branches that could further compromise the already fragile governance of the country. In her statements, Goray refers to Castillo in a peculiar way, calling him "23," a nickname that reveals the lack of formality in the relationships within the high ranks of the government. This detail could be crucial for understanding the internal dynamics of the government and the possible complicities that have existed around this scandal. The businesswoman points out that prosecutors have requested information from her regarding any illicit payments related to the president, and she appears willing to provide data that, according to her, would reach million-dollar figures. A key point highlighted by Goray is how, after receiving a request from Marrufo to lend him money, she became aware of the reality of these bribes. Despite her lack of experience in politics, her intuition indicated to her that something was amiss in the situation. Her account suggests that just two days before the vote on the vacancy took place, several congress members voted against it, which in her opinion confirms the existence of a vote-buying scheme. Additionally, Goray mentions the First Lady, Lilia Paredes, who, according to her, is concerned about the situation regarding the Canta Gallo project. This suggests a direct connection between the First Lady and public policy decisions involving economic and social interests, which could open another front for analysis regarding the role of the presidential family in these scandals. The Judiciary, for its part, has rejected Goray’s request to travel to Tarapoto and Trujillo at the end of the year, which could be interpreted as an attempt by the authorities to keep her under control while the investigation into her statements is ongoing. Such judicial decisions are crucial at a time when accusations of corruption can further polarize Peruvian society. The magnitude of these accusations cannot be underestimated. If it is confirmed that there was a bribery scheme to influence legislative decisions as crucial as the vacancy of a president, this will not only affect the reputation of those involved but also public trust in the country’s democratic institutions. The possibility that an executive negotiated with members of Congress to avoid his removal raises ethical and legal questions that must be urgently addressed. The scandal also highlights the fragility of the Peruvian political system, which has been marked by crises and corruption scandals in recent years. This situation could generate a domino effect that impacts other political actors and lead to new protests or calls for deeper reforms in the government structure. Amid this climate of uncertainty, citizens demand transparency and justice. Every new testimony or clue that emerges from these investigations will be key to determining not only the future of the individuals involved but also the direction the country will take in its quest for more ethical and responsible governance. It is evident that Peru stands at a crossroads, and the decisions made in the coming weeks could define the long-term political future. What is at stake is much more than the reputation of individuals; it is about trust in a system that should represent the interests of all Peruvians. Civil society, the media, and institutions must remain vigilant and demand accountability, for only then can faith be restored in a democratic process that has been largely tarnished by corruption.