Montesinos to Remain Imprisoned Until 2037 Following Sentence Recalculation
Vladimiro Montesinos, the former intelligence chief during Alberto Fujimori’s presidency, will remain in prison until 2037, after Peru’s judicial system overturned a decision that had previously calculated his sentence as served. The Supreme Court revised the computation of his sentence, determining he has 13 years and eight months remaining, according to reporting from La República.
The ruling was issued by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, presided over by Judge María Vásquez Varga, after reviewing a nullity appeal presented by the Public Ministry. Prosecutors had challenged a superior court’s decision to consider detentions from unrelated cases as time served in relation to the Pativilca and La Cantuta cases.
The court’s decision specifies that Montesinos was convicted as an indirect author of aggravated homicide and forced disappearance, crimes considered crimes against humanity. These charges relate to the executions in the Caraqueño-Pativilca case and the kidnapping and murder of students and a professor from La Cantuta University, carried out by the Colina detachment in 1992.
In January 2024, the Fourth National Superior Criminal Court had declared his sentence fulfilled after verifying that Montesinos had been detained since 2001 in connection with various cases. That interpretation has now been reversed. The Supreme Court concluded that this criterion violated Article 47 of the Penal Code.
Six Years Will Be Deducted: The Key to the New Sentence Calculation
The Supreme Court’s decision centers on a technical point with a direct effect on the convicted man’s freedom. Article 47 of the Penal Code allows for the deduction of time spent in detention in the same process for which a sentence is handed down. It does not authorize the accumulation of prison time from separate cases.
The superior court had referenced Montesinos’ initial detention in January 2001, stemming from a corruption case. The Supreme Court deemed this incorrect, stating that the detention was not related to the crimes of Pativilca or La Cantuta.
The court reviewed the accumulated records. In the Caraqueño-Pativilca case, a simple appearance order was issued. In the La Cantuta case, a detention order was in place, lasting 72 months – six years – until it was modified due to the expiration of the maximum term.
the Supreme Court ordered the deduction of only those six years from the total sentence of 19 years and eight months, setting the new completion date as September 30, 2037. This decision nullifies the declaration of sentence completion made in 2024.
Montesinos’ Responsibility in the Massacres of Pativilca and La Cantuta
Montesinos’ conviction is based on his role as the de facto head of the National Intelligence Service during the Fujimori regime. According to the prosecution, he designed and coordinated a policy of eliminating alleged subversives through clandestine operations.
In the Caraqueño-Pativilca case, six people were executed in 1992 after being accused of terrorism. In La Cantuta, nine students and a professor were kidnapped, murdered, and buried in clandestine graves. Both operations were attributed to the Colina detachment.
The sentence was issued under the framework of early conclusion. Montesinos accepted the charges in 2024. The Supreme Court clarified that the criminal responsibility is already a matter of res judicata. The appeal only addressed the calculation of the sentence, and the exception of prescription raised by the defense was deemed inadmissible.
The Court recalls how the 19-year and 8-month sentence was determined. The crimes of aggravated homicide and forced disappearance were analyzed under the figure of real concurrence of crimes, according to the regulations in force in 1992. At that time, the Penal Code established that in cases of real concurrence, the penalty corresponding to the most serious crime was applied. In this case, the murder with treachery, whose penalty ranged from 15 to 25 years.
The superior court first set a concrete penalty of 23 years. It considered that it was appropriate to place it in the upper third due to the seriousness of the facts and the level of responsibility attributed as indirect author. Then, a reduction of one-seventh was applied for accepting the early conclusion. That legal discount resulted in the final sentence of 19 years and 8 months. This aspect was not questioned by the Prosecutor’s Office and remained firm.
The Court warns of an improper application of Article 47 of the Penal Code. The court indicates that the superior court applied Article 47 of the Penal Code incorrectly. This rule regulates the deduction of preventive detention time when setting the sentence. The Court cites its own precedents, such as nullity resources 745-2019/Lima and 3460-2013/Lima, which establish that only prison time derived from the same process that culminates in a conviction can be deducted.
The resolution also specifies that file 022-2001, used as a reference for the initial calculation, corresponded to a process for active bribery of officials. It had no legal link with the Pativilca or La Cantuta cases. With this argument, the highest court concludes that the decision to declare the sentence fulfilled lacked legal basis. It declared the nullity in that regard and reformed the calculation.
