Peru: US arms deal behind cabinet shake-up
Peru's government made a $462 million payment to US defense contractor Lockheed Martin on April 22 for purchase of 12 F-16 fighter jets, the first installment in a controversial multi-billion-dollar deal that triggered the resignation of two top ministers earlier in the day. Defense Minister Carlos Díaz and Foreign Minister Hugo de Zela cited their opposition to interim President José Balcázar's attempt to delay the deal.
The payment came days after a $2 billion contract for 12 F-16s was signed by an official in Peru's Air Force—over the head of Balcázar, who was informed of finalization of the deal only after the fact.
In fact, hours before a ceremonial signing April 17, Balcázar announced in a radio interview that the next president should decide on the deal, saying his interim government lacked the authority to make such a large outlay. In early March, Balcázar had signed a decree designating the project a "military secret," limiting public information about government negotiations for the deal.
In a lengthy post after the signing, the US Embassy said that on April 14 "Lockheed Martin was informed in writing of its selection, with a technical signing scheduled for 7:00am and a ceremonial signing for 5:00pm on April 17." The US ambassador, Bernie Navarro, accused Balcázar of "bad faith" in announcing the postponement, and warned that Washington would use "every available tool" to promote its interests. The "technical signing" finally took place on April 20.
Peru has spent years negotiating with different companies to modernize its aging fleet of Mirage 2000 and MiG‑29 fighters acquired in the 1980s and 1990s. The Air Force says it is looking to eventually acquire a total of 24 jets from Lockheed.
The imbroglio has yet further divided Peru's already rancorous political class, and especially raised suspicions of US intentions. "It's extortion," Jorge Nieto, a centrist presidential candidate and former defense minister, said in a TV interview. "If we don't play our cards right, we run the risk of turning from a country into a territory." (NYT, BreakingDefense, Reuters)
Results still have not been finalized for the hotly contested presidential election, which took place on April 12. Police in Lima on April 24 raided the home of Piero Corvetto, former head of the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), as part of a judicial warrant in an investigation of electoral irregularities. (Al Jazeera)
UN experts criticize removal of Peruvian judge
UN experts on May 1 condemned the dismissal of Peruvian Judge Oswaldo Ordóñez Alcántara, formerly the president of the First Constitutional Chamber of Lima, from his post. The move was described as a reprisal for his defense of judicial independence and his public criticism of legislative reforms that could weaken the rule of law in the country.
The experts commented on the gravity of the issue, saying: "Judges must be able, individually and collectively, to participate in public debate on the organization, functioning and independence of the judiciary, in accordance with their duties of discretion and responsibility, without fear of pressure, deterrent measures or proceedings that could impede the exercise of their institutional functions."
In particular, the experts criticized the line of questioning used by the National Council of Justice of the Republic of Peru about his participation in a hearing on the "State of Judicial Independence in the Americas" before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in November 2024. During the hearing, Judge Ordóñez stated that a group of legislators “have been destabilizing the justice system and, in turn, weakening the Judiciary and the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Peru."
This led the National Board of Justice of Peru to initiate a preliminary investigation, stating that such statements contravene the “appearance of impartiality” expected of magistrates. Critics raised concerns that this type of inquiry treats a legitimate critique of institutional interference as if it were prima facie evidence of judicial misconduct, thereby inverting the logic of accountability and intimidating judicial figures.
The International Association of Judges (IAJ) emphasized the flawed manner in which the investigation was opened against Judge Ordóñez, stating that his comments were made in his capacity as a representative of the profession, not in his official capacity as a judge. The right of association, including participating in fora concerning one's profession, is a protected right, and the decision to launch proceedings against Ordóñez constitutes a direct attack on that right.
In the case of Cuya Lavy v. Peru and Urrutia Laubreaux v Chile, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights established that states have a binding obligation to refrain from adopting measures that may either directly or indirectly constitute retaliation against individuals who participate in discussions over human rights. In light of such existing case law and the fact that judicial independence is codified under the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, the IAJ found the proceedings to be unlawful. (Jurist)