On the one hand, the option of removing him for “permanent moral incapacity”, a poorly defined constitutional cause that only requires a majority of two thirds of votes, does not have the 87 votes necessary to get rid of the president.

Far-right television commentator Phillip Butters lamented that congressmen who for various reasons reject the vacancy are more than enough to prevent the vacancy and suggested drastic action to remove Castillo from office.

At the same time, the constitutional accusation against the president, for alleged treasons against the country -one of the few crimes for which a ruler can be removed from office-, showed his weakness by exposing weak foundations from lawyers and politicians of extreme right.

In addition, the Subcommittee on Constitutional Accusations rejected the proposal of legislator Norma Yarrow, from the same party, to replace Congressman Edgar Reymundo, appointed to prepare the key final report on the case and whom the challenger intended to disqualify for not being part of the hard opposition.

With annoyance, Montoya pointed out that the abstention of two members of the centrist factions, Somos Perú and Podemos, prevented the change from being approved, which may be repeated in the session that will debate and decide next Monday whether the accusation, based on an administrative minor infraction, is approved or archived.

In this context, far-right analyst Fernando Rospigliosi argued that the crisis “cannot be resolved within the institutional framework of this failed democracy” and demanded radical solutions, without which “Peru will fall into an abyss.”

“Now the invocation of a coup is called the need for radical solutions. When politics gives in, bereft of social support, only weapons remain. It’s just that the request is shameful,” said former Defense Minister Jorge Nieto.

ef/rgh/mrs