Years of lies to damage me politically, he said. The courts will decide.
Em um país onde a fronteira entre a disputa eleitoral e a arena judicial há muito se tornou porosa, o Peru assiste a mais um capítulo dessa tensão: Roberto Sánchez, candidato de esquerda que acabou de garantir sua vaga no segundo turno presidencial, enfrenta um pedido de prisão de mais de cinco anos formulado pelo Ministério Público, sob acusação de falsificação de registros de financiamento de campanha entre 2018 e 2020. A coincidência brutal entre a confirmação de sua candidatura e a divulgação das acusações levanta questões que transcendem o caso individual — sobre a saúde das instituições democráticas peruanas e sobre até que ponto o direito e a política caminham, no país, em rotas verdadeiramente separadas.
- O Ministério Público peruano pediu mais de cinco anos de prisão para Sánchez no mesmo dia em que ele foi confirmado no segundo turno, criando uma colisão imediata entre o calendário eleitoral e o judiciário.
- A acusação gira em torno de mais de US$ 57 mil em contribuições de campanha supostamente omitidas das prestações de contas ao órgão eleitoral nacional entre 2018 e 2020.
- Sánchez chegou ao segundo turno por uma margem de apenas um décimo de ponto percentual sobre Rafael López Aliaga, numa apuração arrastada por denúncias de irregularidades no pleito de 12 de abril.
- O candidato nega qualquer irregularidade, afirmando que acusações anteriores já foram arquivadas e que o processo atual é uma tentativa de construir uma narrativa política falsa contra ele.
- Uma audiência marcada para 27 de maio decidirá se o caso vai a julgamento ou é encerrado — resultado que pode remodelar a corrida presidencial semanas antes do segundo turno de junho.
Roberto Sánchez garantiu sua vaga no segundo turno presidencial peruano de junho, mas a confirmação veio acompanhada de uma sombra pesada: na mesma quarta-feira, o Ministério Público pediu a um juiz que o enviasse à prisão por mais de cinco anos. A acusação é de falsificação de registros financeiros de campanha e de omissão de mais de US$ 57 mil em contribuições ao órgão eleitoral nacional entre 2018 e 2020. O caso havia sido apresentado em janeiro, mas um juiz o devolveu por considerá-lo incompleto.
A chegada de Sánchez ao segundo turno foi ela mesma dramática. Ele e o candidato de extrema-direita Rafael López Aliaga ficaram separados por apenas um décimo de ponto percentual — 12% contra 11,9% —, numa apuração que se arrastou por semanas em meio a denúncias de irregularidades no primeiro turno de 12 de abril. Sánchez enfrentará Keiko Fujimori, que liderou o primeiro turno com 17,1% dos votos.
O candidato rejeitou as acusações nas redes sociais, dizendo que há anos se tenta construir uma narrativa falsa para prejudicá-lo politicamente, e lembrou que acusações anteriores de desvio de recursos partidários já foram arquivadas. Os promotores, porém, mantêm o pedido de cinco anos e quatro meses de reclusão.
A audiência judicial de 27 de maio será decisiva: se o caso avançar para julgamento, Sánchez poderá disputar a presidência enquanto enfrenta simultaneamente um processo criminal. O Peru, cujo sistema eleitoral já está sob pressão, aguarda para ver se as instituições agirão com celeridade — e se as acusações resistirão ao escrutínio ou se dissolverão antes do segundo turno.
Roberto Sánchez is heading to Peru's presidential runoff in June, but he may not get there as a free man. On Wednesday, the country's prosecutors asked a judge to send the leftist candidate to prison for more than five years, accusing him of lying to electoral authorities about where his campaign money came from.
The charges center on campaign contributions between 2018 and 2020. According to prosecutors, Sánchez's party, Juntos por el Perú, received more than $57,000 from party members for campaign activities—money that was never reported to Peru's National Electoral Office. Prosecutors say Sánchez falsified financial records and made false declarations in administrative proceedings. The case was first filed in January, but a judge rejected it as incomplete and sent it back for revision.
The timing is brutal. On the same day prosecutors made their request public, election officials confirmed that Sánchez had indeed secured a spot in the June runoff. He will face Keiko Fujimori, a right-wing politician and daughter of former president Alberto Fujimori. Sánchez barely made it through—he and far-right candidate Rafael López Aliaga were separated by just a tenth of a percentage point, with Sánchez at 12 percent and López Aliaga at 11.9 percent. The race was so close that the final count dragged on, delayed by complaints of voting irregularities on April 12.
Sánchez has denied wrongdoing. On social media, he said that for years people have tried to build a false narrative to damage him politically. He pointed out that courts had already dismissed earlier accusations that he personally misused party funds—charges he called baseless. He insists there was no fraud, no embezzlement, nothing criminal.
But the prosecutors are not backing down. They want five years and four months behind bars. A judicial hearing scheduled for May 27 will determine whether the case moves forward to trial or gets dismissed entirely. That hearing comes just weeks before the June runoff, meaning Sánchez could be fighting both a criminal case and a presidential campaign simultaneously.
The broader context matters. Peru's electoral system has been under strain. The April 12 voting was marred by irregularities serious enough to delay the count. Fujimori, who leads the first-round results with 17.1 percent, comes from a family with its own complicated legal history. The country is watching to see whether its courts will move swiftly on Sánchez's case, and whether the charges will stick or crumble under scrutiny. For now, Sánchez remains a candidate—but one with a prison sentence hanging over his head.
Notable Quotes
For years they tried to sustain a lie to discredit me politically. Justice already dismissed charges about alleged personal use of party resources, because fraud and embezzlement never happened.— Roberto Sánchez, on social media
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does a campaign finance case suddenly explode into public view right as the runoff is being decided?
The timing looks suspicious, I know. But the prosecutors say they've been building this case since January. A judge rejected their first attempt and made them redo it. So it's not entirely new—it's a resubmission that happened to land on the same day the election commission confirmed Sánchez qualified.
What exactly did Sánchez allegedly hide?
Over $57,000 in contributions from party members. Money that was supposed to be reported to the electoral authority but wasn't. The prosecutors say the financial records were falsified to cover it up.
And Sánchez's defense?
He says it's political persecution. He points out that courts already threw out the more serious charges—that he personally stole party money. He's saying this is just a different angle on the same false narrative.
Does the distinction matter legally?
It might. One is embezzlement, which is personal theft. The other is failing to disclose contributions, which is a reporting violation. They're different crimes with different weights. But both damage a candidate's credibility.
When will we actually know if he goes to trial?
May 27. That's when a judge decides if there's enough to proceed or if the case gets shelved. It's less than two weeks before the runoff vote.
So he could be campaigning while waiting to hear if he's going to prison?
Exactly. And if the judge rules against him, he could appeal while running for president. Peru's courts will be under enormous pressure to move quickly and fairly.