The trading agreed with the version of the new witness, who worked in the National Council of the Judiciary (CNM), and a number of documents that highlighted what happened in the institution on 28 June. That day – during the ratification process – CPM staff informs that the qualifications of the judges are Pedro Gonzalo Chávarry and Josué Parion suffered changes, the first by more than 10 points and the other by 0.5. Chávarry's example paid special attention to 69.22, with 79.72 points, which means that he is from good enough to good because he is in the fiscal career catalog.
"During the years when I worked in the National Council of Judges, there was never a problem in changing the footnotes with any judges," said lawyer Miguel Montoya, a worker of the Evaluation and Ratification Office, a subject before a specialized prosecutor in organized crime Callao.
Montoya is one of the lawyers responsible for recording all information collected during the ratification process into the virtual world system.
In his statement, Montoya said that on 27 June he left the notes and comments sent by the evaluation team by CNM about the prosecutor, who was properly registered in the virtual system. Pedro Chávarry. This fact was also confirmed by her principal Norma Gutiérrez from prosecution.
The following day, something happened that was considered unpublished: "Eduardo Vargas Vila, IT technician (OTI) […] He told me: "The system did not correctly compile the ratings" […]. I said, "We have to fix this problem" and Eduardo told me that I need to be authorized […] given that the report was completed and the system closed. "
Montoya explained that until 28 June he "could not change notes" because his user profile was "restricted access". On this line, any change could be made only in the office of the computer (OTI): "On [Eduardo Vargas] He retires and returns after 20 minutes and says: "I have already repaired the doctor." "
Montoya stated that he complained to an OTI official about what had happened. "I said," Eduardo, what happened? You changed the qualifications, "and he did not answer, he was silent […]"
-Changes of text-
When Montoya returned to verify the alleged changes in the number of notes, he also noted that the texts with the comments of one of the lawyers who were evaluated – Leyser León – had changed. "I went to see qualified qualifications formats of qualified experts […] The comments were changed in four decisions […]"He said.
For example, regarding the assessment of opinion 2108-2013-MP-FN of Pedro Chávarry, in criterion 1, the original comment was critical: "[…] The fundamental legal problems were not exposed separately, which could help simplify the analysis of fiscal opinion […]"
The modified comment says: "[…] The revised opinion is current and clear, but also prolix in referring to actors […]"
Engineer José Alarcón, head of the OTI-area, where, according to the witness, the changes would have been changed. "I insist that Dr. Chávarry was never qualified with another note that is not 69.22, does not appear in the minutes of the CNM plenary session," he said in a letter addressed to El Comercio.
The incident occurs in reports prepared by the ratification office and, on 3 July, consultant Baltazar Morales mentioned it at a session in which Pedro Chávarry was ratified in line with the audio broadcast of this magazine.
For Alarcón, Chávarry's estimates occurred as a "modular mistake" that, as claims, took place on 27 June in the area of ratification, and not 28 in his office. On the 27th day, he added that Montoya lawyer had free access to the system.
"It should be noted that in the preparation of Dr Chávarry Vallejos' preliminary report on the evening of 27 June this year, Dr Miguel Montoya did not notice the faults of the module […], which means a lack of concern at work, "wrote Alarcón in a memorandum that he sent to his office.
Alarcón added that when the problem was announced on June 28, he was looking for a solution: "the instances were resolved promptly and timely on the same day they were reported and corrected at 10:30 at about 10:30, approximately."
Engineer Eduardo Vargas of the OTI claimed that the "incident in the computer module" created copies of "not only ratings, but also comments".
Among the "screenshots" is the assessment of Opinion 2108 prosecutor Chávarry. It was from 1.2 to 1.66 points. The original text reads as follows: "[…] the fundamental legal problems were not exposed separately […]"
In opinion 757 Chávarryja was set to 0.5, then it appeared with 1.66 points. The original comment said: "[…] the focal points of the object in question are not addressed. The argument is small […]"
Alarcón and Chávarry
José Alarcón said of his alleged closeness to the country's prosecutor: "I am the founder of the public ministry […] so I know some of the judges, among them Dr. Gonzalo Chávarry. "
José Antonio Alarcón was the Director General of the OGTI of the Ministry of Production between August 1, 2011 and March 19, 2012. Jean Carlo Chávarry Romero, son of the prosecutor, worked at this office from October 12, 2011 to the day, when Alarcón left: March 20, 2012
Neither Jean Carlo Chávarry nor the nation's prosecutors agreed to hold an interview for this report.