Scenario of political persecution in a legal process against Keiko Fujimori

In the midst of a fierce legal battle that has captured the attention of an entire country, a scenario has unfolded that has been described by many as a clear case of political persecution. The case that has kept the public opinion on edge is the process led by prosecutor José Domingo Pérez against Keiko Fujimori and more than 40 co-defendants, in which they are accused of crimes related to alleged campaign donations and money laundering. Voices from various sectors of society have spoken out to denounce that what is being witnessed is nothing more than an attempt to criminalize acts that are not considered crimes in a democracy. The legal onslaught has been based on the alleged illegality of donations received by the presidential candidate, such as those from Dionisio Romero or Juan Rassmuss, without strong evidence to support these accusations. The discourse of prosecutor Pérez has been criticized by jurists and analysts, who have pointed out that his arguments lack solid legal basis and are more based on an alleged "criminal intent" attributed to the political organization Fuerza Popular, which he claims has inherited the criminal legacy of Alberto Fujimori. This approach to the process has raised suspicions about the impartiality and objectivity of justice in this case. The situation has been described as akin to a "trial by public opinion," in which the judicial system is being used as a tool to eliminate a political opposition. The polarization generated has had devastating consequences on the political class and the business sector, weakening institutions and fostering a climate of confrontation that has permeated all levels of Peruvian society. The instrumentalization of organizations such as Eficcop and Diviac to carry out actions that have been labeled as a trap against the former lawyer of the president, Mateo Castañeda, has been the latest episode in a series of events that have called into question the integrity of the judicial system and the impartiality of ongoing investigations. The struggle for control of the Public Ministry has become a political battleground where interests beyond justice and transparency are at stake. The call to end processes based on campaign donations has become imperative for many sectors of society who demand an end to a legal war that has only served to deepen division and mistrust in institutions. The need to restore confidence in the judicial system and the impartiality of investigations is presented as a crucial challenge for the future of Peruvian democracy. Reconciliation and the search for consensus are seen as the way forward to overcome this crisis that threatens to undermine the very foundations of democratic coexistence.