Patricia Benavides | Enma Benavides freed the leaders of the international drug trafficking ring Judiciary | Drug Trafficking | Vraem | Illegal Drug Trafficking | principle

According to the anti-narcotics police, Bejarano and Hernandez have been proven to have carried out activities in Peru together with other members of their drug trafficking network. For this reason, when the prosecution presented its indictment, it sought 35 years in prison for Bejarano and two other leaders for aggravated drug trafficking.

However, despite the strength of the evidence, a Benavides court released Pejarano in late 2011 due to insufficient evidence and canceled the arrest warrant against him. As for Gaviria and Hernandez, he set aside the process because it was as if they weren’t there. In the case, Benavides was the debate director; i.e. the one who drew the sentence.

• The Supreme Council of Prosecutors agrees to extend the post of Interim Prosecutor of the Nation to Juan Carlos Villena

Bejarano’s release prompted a complaint from the prosecutor’s office and the Drug Enforcement Administration. For this last company, it was proved that Bejarano, during his stay in Peru, did not carry out activities related to the export of timber and agricultural products, as alleged in the Benavides judgment.

In February 2013, the Permanent Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court declared Bejarano’s acquittal for aggravated drug trafficking null and void due to insufficient evidence and therefore ordered a new oral hearing.

Air export

The case of Peruvian Santos Carrillo Vega and Ecuadorian Bolívar Walter Ramiro García Mafla was identified by the prosecution as the leaders of an international drug trafficking ring that orchestrated drug shipments to Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador. In June 2013, the two were arrested in Lima after anti-narcotics police questioned them for drug shipments to Bolivia.

The prosecutor’s office formalized a criminal complaint against Carrillo, Garcia and other members of the network for illegal drug trafficking and money laundering from DID. For example, Carrillo, who presented himself as a businessman, bought many properties in Ancash, Callo, Lima and Madre de Dios. In addition, he bought vehicles and established textile, livestock and transport companies. According to the tax charge, these activities were carried out with drug trafficking assets.

The investigation included legal wiretaps. In one, since 2012, Carrillo coordinates the collection, exchange and protection of medicines. As a result of these conversations, anti-narcotics police conducted an operation in Huanuco that resulted in the seizure of more than 400 kg of washed basic pasta.

According to narcotics police, Carrillo sent six shipments of cocaine a month to Bolivia. About 300 kg of drugs were transported in each ship.

The judicial process against Carrillo and García for DIT and money laundering was carried out by the Chamber of the High Court specializing in Organized Crime and Corruption of Officials, presided over by Nma Benavides.

As of February 2020, in the judgment of the case prepared by Benavides, Carrillo and García were acquitted of three charges: aggravated illegal drug trafficking, aggravated money laundering (in the form of conversion and exchange) and money laundering (in the form of transportation) .

This last offense relates to events that occurred on June 25, 2013, the day Carrillo and Garcia were arrested. On that date, Carrillo exchanged and ordered US$280,000 and €130,000. The tax indictment cites Carrillo’s statement from 2014 in which he admitted to participating in the day’s events related to the transportation of the funds.

Despite the evidence in the case, the Benavides court acquitted Carrillo and Garcia. Like Bejarano, Carrillo and Garcia’s case reached the Supreme Court. In August 2022, the Transitory Criminal Chamber overturned the acquittal of Carrillo, Díaz and others involved in the three crimes and ordered a new oral hearing.

In the resolution, the Supreme Court ruled that Benavides’ decision “violated the duty of motivation, and the right to due process was violated by not adequately justifying his decision, his decision – lack of evidence – not. All the information provided by the representative of the public ministry – mostly – was consolidated or justified by the evidence.”

Former Interior Minister Carlos Pasombrio drew attention to the Supreme Court’s decisions, which ultimately annulled the proceedings and ordered new trials. However, he pointed out that the accused in the TID, who were acquitted before the apex chambers quashed their proceedings, “you will never find them again”.

Sonia Medina, a former anti-narcotics lawyer, expressed a similar view: “By granting unnecessary liberties […], in the case of a leader or member of an organization, that person will never return. Even if they let him go, he’ll disappear off the map because no one in their right mind is going to come back. This has happened many times,” he said.

“If they are sent back, they are re-indicted, recaptured, but they don’t have a happy ending because there are no drug traffickers in the country; Interpol has also been requested to intervene, but now as long as they are found, the process is over and the person is very well.

Regarding the work of the Dirandro (anti-narcotics police), Basombrío highlighted that it is an elite organization and that “its special investigative teams work on a case for six months, a year or more.”

This newspaper sought Nma Benavides’ version on several occasions but did not receive a response. When he appeared before the JNJ in early May for the process that led to his dismissal, the judge at the time declared that he had engaged in “culpable conduct”. [por] 30 years.”

In an interview with Canal N in November 2022, Benavides also referred to his “reprehensible behavior during these years”. [como jueza]And not because I say, but because […] I didn’t get permission [de los órganos disciplinarios del Poder Judicial]”.