Martín Vizcarra suffers a new judicial setback and remains disqualified for 10 years.

Former President Martín Vizcarra has faced a new judicial setback in his political career following the recent decision by the First Constitutional Chamber of Lima, which has upheld his disqualification from holding public office for a period of 10 years. This ruling comes in the context of the scandal known as 'Vacunagate,' in which Vizcarra was accused of receiving the COVID-19 vaccine from the Chinese laboratory Sinopharm outside of clinical trials, generating strong backlash from Peruvian society and calling into question the ethics of his administration. The chamber's decision, which dismissed the former president's appeal, is based on the lack of evidence supporting his claims that his constitutional rights have been violated. Despite his attempts to argue that his disqualification affects his right to participate in the country's political life, the judges noted that the points raised by Vizcarra were not properly related to the constitutional rights he invoked. The 'Vacunagate' case has not only had repercussions for Vizcarra but has also shaken public trust in government institutions. The crisis triggered by this scandal has led to widespread questioning of transparency and accountability in the management of the pandemic in Peru. Vizcarra's disqualification adds to the sanctions imposed on other political figures, such as former ministers Pilar Mazzetti and Elisabeth Astete, who have also faced consequences for their involvement in the scandal. In addition to his disqualification, Vizcarra is dealing with other legal issues. The Third National Criminal Appeals Chamber also dismissed his appeal in the passive bribery case related to the Lomas de Ilo and Moquegua Hospital projects. In this context, the former president has argued that his right to a fair trial has been violated. However, the judiciary has maintained its stance against Vizcarra's claims. On October 28, the Fourth National Collegiate Criminal Court will begin the oral trial against Vizcarra, where evidence and testimonies regarding the corruption allegations during his administration will be presented. This process could determine the former president's future, at a time when his image is severely tarnished. The public perception of Vizcarra has changed drastically since he took office in 2018, driven by an image of change and renewal. The repercussions of this case extend beyond the legal realm and significantly impact Peruvian politics in general. Vizcarra's disqualification has left a void in politics, especially in a country where trust in leaders is essential for stability and governance. The situation has fostered a climate of distrust towards institutions and has prompted calls for political reform. On the other hand, Vizcarra's defenders continue to argue that he is facing a covert political trial, where judicial decisions are influenced by partisan interests. This argument has resonated with some sectors of the population who see the former president as a victim of a system that seeks to eliminate leaders who challenge the status quo. In conclusion, the upholding of Martín Vizcarra's disqualification due to the 'Vacunagate' case represents not only a blow to the former president but also a reflection of the fractured relationship between politics and justice in Peru. As the oral trial unfolds, the country will be watching closely, hoping that the truth comes to light and that decisions are made to restore trust in institutions. The story of this case is undoubtedly a reminder that the fight against corruption and the pursuit of justice are difficult but necessary paths for the future of the country.