(IPYS/IFEX) – The chief prosecutor of San Martín, Antonio Ruiz Sánchez, has ruled that Lleny Valera’s appeal is founded. Valera is the widow of journalist Tito Pilco Mori, who died in September 1997 under suspicious circumstances (see IFEX alerts). She had appealed a ruling that ordered that the case be definitively closed. The prosecutor ordered […]
(IPYS/IFEX) – The chief prosecutor of San Martín, Antonio Ruiz Sánchez, has
ruled that Lleny Valera’s appeal is founded. Valera is the widow of
journalist Tito Pilco Mori, who died in September 1997 under suspicious
circumstances (see IFEX alerts). She had appealed a ruling that ordered that
the case be definitively closed. The prosecutor ordered the file to be
submitted to the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Internal Control, so that a
decision can be made on what legal action should be taken against the
assistant attorney of Rioja, José Manuel Monteverde Tuesta.
**Updates IFEX alerts of 22 March and 9 March 1999, 29 October and 5
September 1997**
In making his decision, prosecutor Ruiz Sánchez took into consideration a
report that he received from the Ombudsman’s office in March 1999. The
prosecutor received various documents, a cassette recording of an interview
with Edwin Cahuaza Chumbe and a record of the interview signed by him and
the interviewers. In the interview, Cahuaza Chumbe describes with great
detail the preparation of the crime committed against Pilco Mori and
identifies who was behind this act.
In December 1998, a committee made up of representatives of IPYS and the
Ombudsman’s office visited the city of Rioja in order to clear up the
journalist’s death and to investigate accusations about impartiality and
other irregularities in the investigation of the case. One of the denounced
attorneys was Monteverde who, despite the fact that Pilco Mori’s family
members suspected that he was the journalist’s assassin, was working as
assistant in the prosecutor’s office that was handling the investigations.
Furthermore he took over the investigations during the acting prosecutor’s
absence. In February 1999, representatives of the Public Ministry who
supervised the investigation attested to the slowness and partiality that
had marked the process. As such, it is logical that these details be sent to
the appropriate government body to decide if legal action should be taken
against Monteverde.
