Possible alliance between Humala and Sánchez shakes up Peruvian political scene

The recent rapprochement between the ethnocacerist leader Antauro Humala and the president of the Juntos por el Perú party, Roberto Sánchez, has sparked a heated debate in the Peruvian political scene. This encounter, which took place during a sporting event in Los Olivos, has raised the possibility of a potential alliance between both groups leading up to the 2026 elections. Antauro Humala, convicted of the crimes of murder, kidnapping, and rebellion in the case known as the 'Andahuaylazo', has been supported by Roberto Sánchez, who has highlighted the "significant popular and social roots" of the ethnocacerist leader. Sánchez has argued that Humala has already served his sentence and redeemed himself, and that the ethnocacerist bases have the right to participate in the country's political life. Congressman Sánchez has emphasized that the dialogue process for a possible alliance does not exclude the leaders of both groups, but rather the bases will determine if there are enough commonalities for a party alliance. Additionally, he has stated that he will not support laws that seek to limit the citizens' right to freely choose, referring to possible restrictions on candidacy. In the midst of this situation, the Cambio Democrático-Juntos por el Perú parliamentary group, which includes parties like Nuevo Perú, Voces del Pueblo, and Primero la Gente, has stated that they were not aware of the potential alliance between Sánchez and Humala. The spokesperson for the group, Sigrid Bazán, has highlighted the autonomy of each party to make decisions and expressed concerns about reducing the left to a potential Humala candidacy. On the other hand, the members of the Cambio Democrático-Juntos por el Perú parliamentary group have agreed that Sánchez's electoral agreements do not involve the group, avoiding questioning the rapprochement with Humala. They have emphasized that these dialogues and alliances are decisions of the parties in terms of democracy and freedom of association. Amid these discussions, parliamentarian Susel Paredes has rejected the possibility of engaging in a conversation with Humala, while Isabel Cortez has pointed out that the ethnocacerist leader has served his sentence and has paid part of his civil reparations. This stance has generated divided opinions in Congress and society at large. Political analyst Enrique Castillo has highlighted that alliances between diverse groups, such as the one proposed between Humala and Sánchez, are not unusual in Peruvian politics, where the left has shown greater flexibility in joining forces to obtain political representation. These movements, although they may generate controversy, are part of the political game and the struggle for power. In conclusion, the potential rapprochement between Antauro Humala and Roberto Sánchez has opened a new chapter in Peruvian politics, where alliances and debates on the participation of figures with judicial backgrounds become relevant. Society and political parties will need to reflect on the ethical and democratic limits of these associations in the context of the upcoming elections.