Lucas Ghersi: "What Pedro Castillo Did Was Clearly a Coup d'État—A Wolf Disguised as a Wolf"

Article at El Diario de Hoy, published on 12 December 2022: https://www.elsalvador.com/noticias/internacional/entrevista-lucas-ghersi-golpe-estado-peru/1023949/2022/

"A wolf disguised as a wolf." That is how Lucas Ghersi described the coup attempt by former Peruvian president Pedro Castillo on Wednesday, December 7.

The Peruvian constitutional lawyer spoke with El Diario de Hoy about the most recent coup attempt on the international stage—one that, according to him, reflects both authoritarian tendencies and profound clumsiness and desperation.

Ghersi also responded to those who claim that the real coup was against Pedro Castillo, who was removed from office and arrested on the same day. The lawyer dismissed this argument as "ridiculous," stating that Peru's institutions reacted "formidably" to stop the coup attempt.

How do you interpret the intense but brief events of December 7?

What Pedro Castillo did on Wednesday was clearly and irrefutably a coup d'état.

Peru’s constitution allows the president to dissolve Congress if it denies a confidence vote twice, but that had not happened. There was absolutely no room for debate about whether Congress could be dissolved. This was an outright coup.

A coup that also targeted the judiciary?

Pedro Castillo sought to interfere with and take control of the judiciary, the Attorney General’s Office, the Constitutional Tribunal, and all other state institutions. This coup d’état was not a wolf in sheep’s clothing—it was a wolf disguised as a wolf.

Why did he do it?

It’s important to understand the context. That Wednesday, Congress was set to vote on Castillo’s removal due to multiple corruption allegations. That same morning, one of his closest collaborators—who is now in prison—testified in detail about all the bribes he had received and the exact amount he had given to the former president.

When Castillo did the math on his likely removal, he saw that the chances of being ousted were high. So, it is most likely that his coup attempt was a last-minute, desperate attempt to avoid impeachment—an impulsive and anti-democratic response.

Do you think this was clumsiness or authoritarianism on Castillo’s part?

From day one, Pedro Castillo had an anti-democratic mindset. From the beginning, he threatened to create a Chávez-style Constituent Assembly to consolidate power and shut down Congress. He always proposed authoritarian measures.

He is a clumsy authoritarian, but that does not make him any less dangerous. Clumsiness can also cause significant harm to a country. He was likely pushed toward the coup by radical officials, some of whom were linked to front organizations of the Shining Path. So, I think it was both clumsiness and authoritarianism.

Did Peruvian institutions hold firm?

Peruvian institutions resisted formidably—it was a true lesson in civic education. It was a beautiful day that made me proud to be Peruvian. When Pedro Castillo announced the coup, most of his ministers, who had not been consulted beforehand, resigned—perhaps out of fear of being arrested or considered accomplices.

What about oversight institutions?

State institutions such as the judiciary, the Constitutional Tribunal, the Attorney General’s Office, and the National Board of Justice all issued statements rejecting the coup. Most importantly, the National Police of Peru and the Armed Forces declared that they would not obey or enforce unconstitutional orders.

As a result, Castillo was left completely isolated. Instead of taking him to the Mexican embassy, where he had planned to seek asylum, his own security detail took him to a police station, where he was arrested for attempting to overthrow the constitutional order.

Peru has a troubled recent history of presidents who do not complete their terms or end up facing legal action.

How can the country heal and return to institutional normalcy?

Peru’s constitution allows for the dissolution of Congress, but for decades there was an unwritten rule that this was a “nuclear option” that should not be used. Politicians respected their opponents and negotiated instead. Peruvian politics, for the most part, followed a gentlemanly code.

That changed with Martín Vizcarra, an authoritarian president very similar to Nayib Bukele. Vizcarra governed not with his ministers but with image consultants and pursued a destructive policy of confrontation with Congress to boost his popularity. He was the first to push the “nuclear button” of dissolving Congress, doing so in a legally questionable way.

Since then, Peruvian politics has deteriorated. The old unwritten rules and gentlemanly agreements have been replaced by demagoguery and the toxic influence of politicians who prioritize popularity at any cost.

What do you think of those who argue that this was actually a coup against Castillo? Are there serious voices making that claim?

There is no doubt that what Pedro Castillo did on Wednesday was a coup d’état. As I said, it was a wolf disguised as a wolf. It is 100% certain that there was a coup attempt, and those who claim otherwise are being ridiculous.

In reality, Castillo’s defenders aren’t even trying to justify his actions anymore. Instead, they are pushing absurd theories—that he was drugged, that he was threatened, or even that someone pulled a gun on him and forced him to attempt the coup. One of Castillo’s supporters even suggested this publicly.

These claims are completely absurd. Pedro Castillo underwent a toxicology test and was found to be sober. So, we know he was neither drugged nor disoriented when he declared the coup. He was simply a clumsy, frightened, and authoritarian man.