Antauro Humala and the controversy over criminal records in politics: Is democracy at risk?

Last August, we were surprised to learn that Antauro Humala, leader of the uprising in Andahuaylas in 2005, had been released from prison thanks to alleged hours of work and courses in crafts and baking, something he later denied. This situation has once again brought to the forefront the debate about the participation of people with criminal records in the country's political life, especially in a context where a bill is being debated in Congress that seeks to establish restrictions for these cases. The bill approved in the Congress's Constitution Committee proposes that those convicted of serious crimes, such as terrorism, drug trafficking, corruption, among others, must wait up to ten years after serving their sentence to run for public office or hold public positions. This measure aims to protect society from potential threats to democracy, considering the seriousness of the crimes committed. However, despite the importance of this bill, its approval in the full Congress has been delayed. The President of Congress and the President of the Constitution Committee seem to be passing the responsibility back and forth, leaving a crucial decision in limbo that should be ready for the 2026 elections. This delay only shows a lack of commitment to democracy and the security of citizens. It is concerning that, despite the current constitutional provisions prohibiting convicts from running for public office in the first instance, there are still legal loopholes that allow situations like the registration of the A.N.T.A.U.R.O. party with the JNE. This is a sign that democracy cannot afford to be naive or foolish, and that clear limits need to be established to protect its integrity. The resistance of some congressmen to debate and approve this bill has sparked speculation about possible personal interests involved. It has been mentioned that some parliamentarians may fear that this measure will affect their own political aspirations, which shows a lack of commitment to the welfare of society and transparency in the country's political life. In this context, the stance of President Dina Boluarte, who seeks to avoid being investigated, also raises questions about the true intention behind this resistance to establish measures that promote the integrity of democracy. It is important to remember that accountability and transparency are fundamental pillars of a strong democratic system, and that any attempt to evade justice only undermines the public's trust in their representatives. In conclusion, the discussion about the participation of people with criminal records in the country's political life is not just a legal issue, but also an ethical and moral one. Democracy cannot afford to be lenient with those who have broken the law and threatened the security and well-being of society. It is necessary to establish clear and effective mechanisms to protect the integrity of our institutions and ensure the trust of citizens in the democratic system.