Peru’s Congress has passed a controversial anti-NGO law limiting civil society’s ability to pursue legal action against the state for human rights violations. The law, viewed as an attack on civil liberties, has been condemned by various human rights organizations who warn it undermines access to justice for the vulnerable. Supporters of the legislation argue it promotes transparency, although it raises significant concerns about governmental oversight and repression of NGOs.
Human rights organizations in Peru are raising significant concerns regarding a newly passed anti-NGO law, which prohibits civil society groups from initiating legal actions against the state for human rights violations. Activists are apprehensive that this legislation will hinder vulnerable populations from seeking justice. The Peruvian Congress enacted the legislation, which saw 81 votes in favor, 16 against, and four abstentions, demonstrating rapid advancement through legislative procedures.
This legislation intensifies the authority of the Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation (APCI), increasing its monitoring capacities over international aid and potentially undermining the autonomy of non-profit organizations. This action is part of a broader trend of government-supported restrictions on civil and human rights, alongside curtailments on press freedom, raising alarm among international observers. Polling indicates widespread disapproval of President Dina Boluarte and Congress, with approval ratings dropping below 5%.
Supporters of the law argue it enhances funding transparency for civil society and reinforces governmental supervision over foreign influences. Ahead of the vote, lawmaker Alejandro Aguinaga of the right-leaning Fuerza Popular party alleged that NGOs exploit international cooperation for personal gain, harming the impoverished citizens of Peru, amid his own controversial past involving forced sterilizations of Indigenous women.
Opposition leader Carlos Rivera, head of the Legal Defense Institute, denounced the legislation as “simply brutal.” He warned that it poses a severe threat to legal recourse for human rights violation victims, who predominantly rely on NGOs for support. The new law establishes harsh penalties, including fines up to $500,000, for NGOs that engage in legal action against the government, both domestically and abroad.
Rivera compared the law’s unconstitutionality to Peru’s infamous 1995 amnesty laws, which previously protected military and police from prosecution for human rights abuses during the 1980-2000 conflict with leftist groups. These earlier laws were eventually deemed unconstitutional for infringing upon justice rights and international human rights standards.
Julia Urrunaga, the Peru director at the Environmental Investigation Agency, rebuffed claims of NGO accountability issues, asserting that NGOs have adhered to the same regulatory practices as other civil society entities for over two decades. She emphasized that this law restricts civil society’s independence and ability to defend citizens’ human rights.
The Amazon Indigenous peoples’ regional organization, Orpio, expressed that the law represents a profound regression for Indigenous rights and their access to justice. Given Peru’s historical context of military governance and corruption, civil society groups have often been instrumental in promoting national development and justice.
However, the ultra-conservative faction in Peru has perpetuated narratives suggesting the misuse of USAid funds for political agendas. This sentiment gained momentum following significant cuts to USAid programs by former President Donald Trump. President Boluarte has also openly criticized NGOs, claiming, “We cannot allow the discourse of human rights to be used as an ideological weapon to undermine the authority of the state and delegitimise the principle of order.”
Under investigation for her alleged involvement in anti-government protest fatalities and other corruption allegations, President Boluarte maintains her innocence against any wrongdoing.
The recent passage of Peru’s anti-NGO law has sparked considerable alarm among human rights activists and organizations. With restrictions on legal recourse for civil society groups, concerns have arisen regarding the potential suppression of justice for vulnerable individuals. The legislative shift reflects a growing trend of governmental overreach into civil liberties, prompting both national and international scrutiny of President Boluarte’s administration and its implications for human rights advocacy in Peru.
Original Source: www.theguardian.com
