According to the Peruvian Foreign Ministry, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the Colombian charge d’Affaires to express his surprise “at the statements by authorities of that country about recent events in Peru.” according to a trill from the Peruvian entity.
After the removal of the former president of Peru Pedro Castillo, who failed in his attempt to dissolve Congress, the president of Colombia, Gustavo Petro, made a request to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) requesting that precautionary measures be issued in favor of of Castle.
“I ask the IACHR to apply the American Convention on Human Rights and issue precautionary measures in favor of the President of Peru, Pedro Castillo. He has violated the right to elect and be elected, and to have an independent trial court, ”Petro wrote on Twitter last Thursday.
According to the Foreign Ministry, Peru has made it clear that human rights, separation of powers, and justice are respected in the country.
“He was reminded that in Peru there is full respect for human rights, due process and the separation of powers, which guarantees the access of all our citizens to independent justice,” says the Twitter account.
In addition, the Peruvian Government, through its Foreign Ministry, adds that it will continue to deepen ties of friendship and cooperation with Colombia: “The Government of Peru will continue to deepen the friendship, cooperation and integration that unite both peoples, based on mutual respect , the full validity of international law and shared values on democracy and human rights.”
Demonstrations of Peru against Mexico
Similarly, the Peruvian Foreign Ministry expressed in a statement that it summoned the Mexican ambassador to Peru, Pablo Monroy, “In order to convey the surprise that the expressions of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard have generated in Peru, regarding the political processes in the country.”
in your account Twitter, The president of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), expressed his opinion on the political crisis in Peru last Wednesday, and although he initially promised to stick to what he called “our foreign policy, non-intervention and the self-determination of the peoples”, later declared that the Peruvian political and economic elite had attacked Castillo in a hostile manner.
“We consider it unfortunate that for the interests of the economic and political elites, since the beginning of the legitimate presidency of Pedro Castillo, an environment of confrontation and hostility has been maintained against him, to the point of leading him to make decisions that have served his adversaries to consummate his dismissal”, affirmed AMLO. In addition, he branded the reason for dismissal of “moral incapacity” as a “sui generis precept.”
In its statement, the Ministry of Relations of Peru made it clear that the expressions from the Mexican Government did mean interference: “The expressions of the Mexican authorities constitute interference in the internal affairs of Peru, and are not consistent with the events that took place.” They have happened in recent days.”
President López Obrador would also have confirmed that Castillo had formally requested political asylum in Mexico, in the early hours of last Thursday.
“We have proceeded to initiate consultations with the Peruvian authorities,” was what he wrote on Twitter the Secretary of Foreign Relations of Mexico, Marcelo Erbrard, implying that it is an option that they are considering.
The Foreign Ministry also responded to that request: “Regarding the statements by said authorities regarding the right to asylum invoked by former President Pedro Castillo, Ambassador Monroy was told of the need for states to adhere to the rules contained in international treaties in force on the matter and comply with all the requirements that they establish.
So far, only the leaders of Colombia, Mexico and Venezuela have spoken out against Castillo’s removal. The president of Venezuela spoke about the events in a public act and affirmed that the Castillo government had been marked by “persecution” and that the opposition had taken it to the extreme.