Tumialán hopes that the congressmen will fully comply with the Constitutional Court's ruling on Falconí, and that implies accepting that the mandate of the members of the National Board of Justice (JNJ) is valid for five years. Otherwise they would be committing a constitutional violation and anyone can report them.
-The decision of the Constitutional Court (TC) to allow Marco Falconí to join the JNJ indicates that the term of office of its members is five years…
-They state verbatim in paragraph 59 that “Article 155 of the Constitution, as we interpret it, provides that the mandate of the members of the National Board of Justice is for a period of five years”, but they do so under the logic that This mandate will be exercised within certain time coordinates, that is, from 2020 to 2025.” The Constitutional Court agrees with us. If we add that our Organic Law, approved by Parliament, indicates that there are 37 reasons for the vacancy, separation or dismissal of a board member, none of which are related to age…
-Should the causes be specifically stated?
-That's right, precise, concrete. None of them relate to age, as the legislature has indicated that one must be a member National Justice Office There was a margin, namely in Article 56, third paragraph; It says over 45 and under 75, we had to apply in this area. And we did it, and if we were appointed we would have five years left. And as for the accusation and disqualification approved by the Standing Commission, there is no basis either, since the case is a matter of interpretation, a matter of judgment. And if we do not agree with our own criteria, we must have great respect for the institutions, and that leads to the independence of autonomous constitutional bodies.
YOU CAN SEE: Congress wants to hire an agency for parliamentarians to travel abroad
– So no one can question your resolutions?
-The heavily questioned Resolution 224-2020 of the JNJ (on the permanent term of Judge Inés Tello) could be reviewed, it could justify a request for protection, a compliance lawsuit and a popular lawsuit. Any person, not just those potentially affected, who in this case would be the representatives, can turn to the judiciary and file the guaranteed actions provided for by the Constitution and the Constitutional Code of Procedure. Therefore, there is no constitutional violation in the present case. So much so that last year, after it was discovered that the age of the members of the National Board of Justice was not established as a reason for the vacancy, four bills were submitted to Congress, which are in the Commission on the Judiciary. Constitution and justice.
– Could the legislators argue that the TC ruling comes after the rapporteur's report and is not applicable to their case?
-But it confirms what we've been saying all along.
-Do parliamentarians have to take this into account when casting their votes?
-You would undoubtedly have to take into account what the greatest interpreter of the Constitution points out, namely the Constitutional Court, because we are in a state governed by the rule of law, in a constitution and in a democracy. We must care about the value of constitutionality, which is the basis for the development and quality of life of the people in the country. I hope that law and justice will prevail in the plenary session of the Congress of the Republic in the face of the accusations and disqualifications of the Executive Board members.
YOU CAN SEE: Audio recordings by Nicanor Boluarte reveal the coordination of positions in Dina Boluarte's government
-What would happen to them if the congressmen did not follow the TC's decision?
-I didn't think about it because as a lawyer I am still convinced that they will evaluate all the circumstances. But what I ask is that you value the Constitutional Court's decision because you yourself requested it, and that it follows the same line of analysis and the same result as what we claim.
-It turned out that a few days ago a delegation from the International Monetary Fund asked about the risks of the JNJ in order to include the information in their annual report. Was that the reason?
-The President and Vice President were present and informed us about it. International organizations and delegations are coming to collect and verify what is happening with the junta, and the IMF has set this goal, as have other anti-corruption missions. In addition, we are aware of this because the state, through its mechanisms, asks us for information and communicates it through diplomatic channels.
– If they are already ten months away from fulfilling their mandate, why do you think they are so desperate to fire them?
– When making the assessment, I assume that two circumstances exist. One of them is that we are in the process of evaluating the heads of ONPE and Reniec and there is a regulation to determine whether they will be ratified or not. Perhaps there is fear in this case. And the second problem that worries me greatly is impunity, which we cannot allow.
YOU CAN SEE: Rodolfo Orellana: Payments from S/2,500 soles to $8,000 for court eviction orders
– When you talk about impunity, are you referring to the investigation against the suspended prosecutor Patricia Benavides?
-On the board we have several investigations. There are around 70 disciplinary proceedings in which serious offenses would occur that would go unpunished because they would become statute-barred over time and could not be punished.
-Couldn't their substitutes take over?
-They could see it, but by the time they take over and reopen the cases, time passes, so those cases would just expire.
-I insist that the congressmen would be committing a crime if they did not fully comply with the TC's decision?
-It's a violation.
– Then they could be accused of violating the constitution …
-Undoubtedly the decision comes from the highest court interpreting the norm. But I emphasize again: I am a very trustworthy person and we must continue to fight for the independence of autonomous constitutional bodies.