Supreme Court dissolves A.N.T.A.U.R.O. and closes the chapter for Antauro Humala.

The Supreme Court has made a historic decision by ratifying the dissolution of the political organization National Alliance of Workers, Farmers, University Students, Reservists, and Workers (A.N.T.A.U.R.O.), led by the controversial Antauro Humala. This resolution, which was announced last Wednesday, comes at a crucial moment for Humala's political future, as he aspired to participate in the general elections of 2026. The unanimous decision of the Permanent Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court puts a definitive end to the possibilities for the ethnocacerist leader to register in the electoral roll. The ruling confirms the first-instance verdict that declared A.N.T.A.U.R.O. illegal, ordering not only the cancellation of its registration but also the closure of its offices and the prohibition of its re-registration in the Registry of Political Organizations (ROP) of the National Jury of Elections (JNE). The Court has made it clear that there is no room for reinterpreting the previous decision, dismissing the appeals filed by the organization’s defense. During the hearing, representatives of A.N.T.A.U.R.O. argued that Antauro Humala was merely “another member” within the organization and that he was currently suspended. However, this argument was not enough to sway the court, which viewed Humala's figure as having too significant an influence on the organization to ignore his impact. Rubén Ramos Zapana, a leader of A.N.T.A.U.R.O., expressed concern about the impact of this decision on the more than 36,000 members that make up the organization. In his statements, Ramos insisted that the dissolution affected the rights of its members while denouncing what he considered "media misinformation" regarding the relationship between Humala and the party. His passionate argument, however, failed to convince the judges that the organization should continue to exist. For his part, A.N.T.A.U.R.O.'s lawyer, Jesús Barboza, made an effort to clarify that the only legitimate representation of the organization rests with Ramos Zapana, dismissing any connection of Humala with the party's activities. This attempt to distance themselves from Humala appears to be an effort to avoid collective responsibility for the actions of the ethnocacerist leader, who has been the subject of multiple controversies throughout his political career. Supreme Deputy Prosecutor Hernán Mendoza argued against A.N.T.A.U.R.O.'s appeal, stating that its claims were mere repetitions of previous arguments and lacked sufficient support to alter the ruling. Mendoza emphasized that the resolution does not contravene the Political Organizations Law and that the entire process was conducted properly and fairly. The Court has made it clear that the actions of an individual leader will not be allowed to jeopardize the integrity and principles under which electoral law operates. Such decisions are essential for maintaining political stability and democratic order in the country, especially in a context where polarization and distrust towards political parties are increasingly evident. The fall of A.N.T.A.U.R.O. also raises questions about the future of ethnocacerist militancy in Peru, a movement that has sought to reclaim indigenous identity and the rights of the most vulnerable communities. However, Humala's figure has been marked by controversy and conflicts with the law, generating significant rejection in various sectors of society. With the dissolution of A.N.T.A.U.R.O., a new chapter opens in the political history of the country, one that could have far-reaching implications for how political parties are organized and regulated in Peru. The decision may be seen as an important precedent in the fight against corruption and abuse of power in the political arena. Finally, as Humala prepares to present a new appeal seeking to halt the threats he has made against former presidents, it remains to be seen how events will unfold in the Peruvian political landscape. The dissolution of his party appears to be a significant blow to his future ambitions, but the debate over his figure and influence in Peruvian politics will likely continue in the coming months.