Peru's Congress disqualifies former Health Minister Víctor Zamora for 10 years.

This Friday, the full Congress of the Republic of Peru made a significant decision by approving the disqualification of former Health Minister Víctor Zamora for a period of ten years. This measure is framed within a context of accountability for the purchase of 1 million 400 thousand rapid tests during the crisis generated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The voting, which was carried out separately, exceeded the 50 votes necessary for the constitutional accusation and reached the 66 votes required for disqualification, as stipulated in the Congress Regulations. The accusation was presented by parliamentarian María Acuña, president of the Subcommittee on Constitutional Accusations, and supported by congressman Jorge Montoya. During the presentation of the final report, Montoya argued that Zamora had neglected his duties by allowing the continuation of administrative acts that did not comply with current regulations. He is particularly held responsible for his handling of the oxygen crisis at a critical moment in the pandemic, as well as for failing to adequately supervise the execution of an emergency decree regulating the acquisition of rapid tests. The report highlights that between March 20 and 29, 2020, Zamora did not take the necessary measures to ensure that the purchases of rapid tests were carried out in accordance with national health policy, which exposed his alleged negligence. In a context where the acquisition of supplies and tests was crucial for managing the pandemic, his management has been subject to analysis and criticism. In this regard, Víctor Zamora spoke out after learning of the Congress's decision, calling the measure "arbitrary" and coming from a "delegitimized Congress." He claimed that his disqualification could open the door to similar actions against other former officials who also played critical roles during the pandemic. Zamora indicated that the accusation lacks solid foundations and is part of a political strategy to silence those considered opponents of the current government. Zamora defended his management by arguing that the country was not adequately prepared to face the health crisis. According to his account, Peru should have had dozens of laboratories and sufficient resources to carry out molecular tests, but the reality was very different. He emphasized that the country had only managed to acquire 10,000 molecular tests, of which he effectively received a very small amount, complicating the response to the health emergency. The former minister also commented that decisions in public management are complex and delicate, especially in times of crisis. He assured that despite the criticism he has received, he acted within the context of an emergency that required quick and effective responses, and that this involved making difficult decisions. Zamora stressed that the circumstances led him to opt for the acquisition of rapid tests due to the lack of adequate resources. The Congress's pronouncement has generated divisions in public opinion, where some see the disqualification as a necessary act of accountability, while others consider it a political strategy to delegitimize certain actors from the previous government. This event highlights not only the fragility of politics in the country but also the impact that the health crisis has had on public management and the perception of authority. In this context, Víctor Zamora's situation reflects the difficult relationship between politics and public management in times of crisis. The disqualification adds to a series of questions about how resources and decisions were managed during the pandemic, which could have long-term repercussions on citizens' trust in their political leaders. On the other hand, Congress is also currently discussing the draft of the New Agrarian Law, which adds another layer of tension to the legislative agenda. Public attention is divided between analyzing Zamora's case and the possible changes looming in the agrarian sector, which could significantly impact farmers and the rural economy of the country. In conclusion, Víctor Zamora's disqualification is a clear example of how Peruvian politics continues to face challenges in terms of governance, accountability, and crisis management. The Congress's decision is not only a reflection of an internal power struggle but also of the consequences that the pandemic has left on the political and social structure of the country. The response to these decisions and the repercussions they will have in the future will continue to be a topic of debate in Peruvian society.