Peru‘s Congress recently approved a bill introducing a statute of limitations for crimes against humanity and war crimes, a decision that has sparked significant controversy and concern among human rights advocates. This legislation represents a pivotal moment in the country‘s ongoing struggle with its dark past, raising critical questions not only about justice and accountability, but also—and especially—about human rights.

Here are some legislative details for you:

On July 4, 2024, Peru‘s Congress passed a bill with a significant majority, introducing a statute of limitations for crimes against humanity and war crimes. The legislation, which is promoted by the right-wing Popular Force (PF) party led by Keiko Fujimori, aims to address legal challenges faced by elderly military and police officers accused of human rights violations during Peru‘s internal conflict from 1980 to 2000. This conflict, which resulted in approximately 69,000 deaths and disappearances, mostly involved the state and insurgent groups like the Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso).

Founded in the 1980s by Abimael Guzmán, the Shining Path was a Peruvian Maoist insurgent group with the goal of overthrowing the government to establish a communist state. Known for its brutal tactics, including bombings, assassinations, and massacres, the group is designated as a terrorist organization by Peru and several other countries. The conflict left a lasting impact on Peruvian society, and the pursuit of justice for the victims has been a prolonged and very complex process.

Proponents of the new law argue that it is necessary to prevent what they see as the unjust persecution of elderly individuals. They claim the legislation addresses the prolonged legal battles faced by these accused military and police officers. President Dina Boluarte‘s administration supports the bill, dismissing international criticism as unwarranted interference in Peru‘s domestic affairs.

Human rights organizations strongly oppose the bill, arguing that it weakens accountability for severe human rights violations, such as crimes against humanity, which they believe should have no statute of limitations due to their grave nature. Both the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Human Rights Watch have condemned the legislation, expressing concerns that it could obstruct justice for numerous victims of past atrocities, including those perpetrated during the regime of former President Alberto Fujimori. Fujimori (1990 – 2000) was convicted in 2007 for authorizing death squad killings and kidnappings by the military, known as the La Cantuta massacre and the Barrios Altos massacre. He was also found guilty of embezzlement and bribery, initially receiving a 25-year prison sentence. In 2009, it was increased to 25 years for human rights abuses and an additional 7.5 years for embezzlement, to be served concurrently.

In 2017, Fujimori was controversially pardoned by then-President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski on humanitarian grounds, citing his health issues, a decision that sparked protests in Peru. In 2019, after a Peruvian court annulled his pardon in October 2018, he was imprisoned again, citing procedural irregularities. Fujimori was then re-incarcerated to complete his 25-year sentence for human rights abuses and corruption charges, initially held at Lima's National Criminal Investigation Directorate (DIRINCRI) police station before being transferred to Barbadillo prison, where he remained until 2023. Hence, without even finishing his sentence.

But what does it all mean?

Surely, the introduction of a statute of limitations for crimes against humanity in Peru is seen as a significant setback for human rights. It contravenes international standards, which hold that such crimes are so severe that they should not be constrained by time limits. This principle is enshrined in various international human rights instruments, including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Numerous human rights advocates warn that the legislation could embolden other countries to adopt similar measures, weakening global human rights protections. It sends a troubling message that political expediency can override the imperative of justice for the gravest of crimes. Furthermore, it undermines the rights of victims and their families to seek redress and accountability. Peru, you can do better!