The assumption of office by Peru’s eighth president within the last decade has once again rendered the country’s chronic political instability visible. The appointment of 83-year-old Jose Maria Balcazar as interim president, following the removal of Jose Jeri by Congress, took place within the constitutional framework; however, it has demonstrated the persistence of structural tensions between the executive and legislative branches in Peruvian politics. This development was not merely the result of an individual corruption allegation but rather a reflection of the institutional fragility into which Peru’s political system has fallen in recent years.
The process that led to Jeri’s removal began with a controversy known as “Chifa-gate” (named after a Peruvian-style Chinese restaurant), which revolved around unrecorded meetings with Chinese businessman Zhihua Yang that were not included in the official schedule. The concealment of contacts that Peruvian law requires to be disclosed sparked public debate over transparency. Jeri’s rejection of the accusations and his characterization of them as a political smear campaign recalled the dynamics of “judicial-political struggle” frequently observed in Latin America. Nevertheless, Congress’s decision to remove him by a strong majority revealed the weakening of the executive’s political legitimacy.
Peru’s experience with eight different leaders since 2016 suggests a systemic problem that cannot be explained solely by individual crises. The presidents’ inability to complete their terms in office and Congress’s frequent use of confidence votes and impeachment mechanisms indicate that checks and balances within the political system have come to generate crises rather than stability. This situation has demonstrated that constitutional instruments have become part of political competition and that institutional continuity has been undermined.
Jose Maria Balcazar’s assumption of office as interim president until the end of July has signified a short-term transition period. His pledge to ensure a “peaceful and transparent democratic transition” has been interpreted as an effort to restore declining public trust.[1] However, Balcazar’s previous vote against a bill banning child marriages has sparked controversy, particularly among young voters and women’s rights advocates. This shows that the transition process entails not only a technical dimension but also a social legitimacy issue.
The upcoming electoral calendar has constituted a critical threshold for Peru. The apparent difficulty of any candidate surpassing the 50% threshold in the first round on April 12 has increased the likelihood of a second round on June 12. Public opinion polls indicating that a large proportion of voters remain undecided have revealed the persistence of political uncertainty. This picture suggests that voter behavior in Peru has become volatile and protest-oriented in recent years.
The prominence of right-wing candidates Keiko Fujimori and Lima Mayor Rafael Lopez Aliaga suggests that right-leaning discourses may regain strength in Peruvian politics. The Fujimori surname’s association with the period between 1990 and 2000, when the country was governed by Alberto Fujimori, has revived both expectations of security and stability and renewed debates over authoritarianism among voters. In this context, the electoral process has become decisive not only for leadership change but also for the nature of Peru’s democratic trajectory.
From an economic perspective, it is well known that political instability has adverse effects on the investment climate. Over the past two decades, Peru has been regarded as a regional success story due to its macroeconomic stability and strong performance in the mining sector. However, frequent changes in the presidency have complicated long-term policy planning. This has reduced predictability, particularly for foreign investors, and increased the risk premium.
At the societal level, public trust in political institutions has been significantly eroded. Citizens’ expressions such as “we have grown accustomed to crises” indicate the normalization of political instability.[2] The perception that Congress is preoccupied solely with changing presidents points to a deepening crisis of representation. This has demonstrated that the legitimacy of democratic institutions is being questioned not only on legal grounds but also based on societal consent.
From an international relations perspective, these developments in Peru have also had regional repercussions. The recent presidential impeachments and removals in Latin America have raised questions about the resilience of democratic institutions. Peru’s political instability has been assessed as a factor that could hinder economic and diplomatic coordination in the Andean region. In particular, the “Chifa-gate” controversy, occurring in the context of increasing economic relations with China, has exposed the delicate balance between foreign policy and domestic politics.
In the long term, the fundamental issue confronting Peru has been the need to redefine the balance of power between the legislature and the executive. If Congress continues to employ impeachment mechanisms frequently as a tool of political competition, the presidential system may lose its capacity to generate stability. Conversely, an inclusive and conciliatory political approach adopted by the newly elected leader could help rebuild institutional trust. This process has been a test of Peruvian democracy’s resilience.
The long-term impact of these ongoing leadership changes on Peru’s political culture should not be overlooked. The frequent removal of presidents within short periods has fostered pragmatic and temporary preferences in voter behavior, strengthening a tendency toward anti-system or “trial-and-error” voting rather than ideological commitment. This has weakened the institutionalization of political parties and brought personal leadership figures to the forefront. At the same time, the continuity of state capacity has been damaged; the replacement of bureaucratic cadres and shifts in policy priorities with each new administration have deepened instability in public governance. In such an environment, the mere functioning of democratic procedures has proven insufficient; the construction of a minimum consensus among political actors has become vitally important. Otherwise, the crisis confronting Peru risks becoming a permanent structural governance problem rather than a series of temporary presidential changes.
In conclusion, the leadership change in Peru has been indicative not only of a corruption scandal but also of structural political instability. The forthcoming elections will be decisive for the country’s democratic orientation, economic stability, and institutional trust. Peru’s future has come to depend on the capacity of constitutional mechanisms to produce consensus rather than crises.
[1] Buschschlüter, Vanessa, and Yang Tian. “Peru Names Eighth President in a Decade after Incumbent’s Ouster.” BBC News, www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgkp84mmmvo, (Erişim Tarihi: 22.02.2026).
[2] Aynı yer.
