PERU Country Profile

Judicial System

Individual Corruption

According to Freedom House 2009 and Transparency International Global Corruption Barometer 2009, the judiciary is perceived to be among the most distrusted public institutions by Peruvian households. User surveys also indicate that unofficial payments affect both the speed and the final outcome of judicial processes.

Business Corruption

According to the World Bank & IFC Enterprise Surveys 2006, the judicial system is perceived to be unfair and untrustworthy by many foreign companies, and managers report that bribes are widely used to facilitate judicial proceedings.

According to the US Department of State 2009, foreign investors have found that contracts are often difficult to enforce because the judicial system is very slow to hear cases and to issue decisions. Outcomes have been difficult to predict and enforce, and judicial corruption is allegedly frequent. Foreign investors often resort to arbitration to resolve business disputes, thus avoiding time-consuming judicial procedures.

Political Corruption

The Peruvian judiciary inherited a legacy from the Fujimori era of a discredited reputation and vulnerability to political and economic influences. During his presidency, Fujimori removed 70% of the judges and, according to Freedom House 2008, filled the open positions with appointees on a 'provisional basis' - meaning that they lacked experience and were effectively beholden to the government. The number of judges affiliated with the government in such a way has since declined from 70% to 30% in 2006, but the presence of corrupt judges remains a serious problem. Throughout 2006, more than 100 judges who were previously suspended due to suspicion of corruption or incompetence were reinstated.

According to the Bertelsmann Foundation 2010, reforms intended to strengthen the independence of the judiciary have been unsuccessful, due mainly to a lack of consensus-building between policymakers. The entities that have shown the most independence from political influence are the Constitutional Court and the Ombudsman's Office.

Frequency

The World Bank & IFC: Doing Business 2010:
- Enforcing a commercial contract in Peru requires a company to go through an average of 41 administrative procedures, taking an average of 428 days and costing an average of 35.7% of the claim.

- The equivalent average numbers for OECD countries are 31 procedures, 463 days and 19% of the claim.

World Economic Forum: The Global Competitiveness Report 2009-2010:
- Business executives give the judiciary's level of independence from influences of members of government, citizens, or companies a score of 2.9 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'heavily influenced' and 7 'entirely independent').

- Business executives give both the efficiency of the legal framework for private companies to settle disputes and to challenge the legality of government actions and/or regulations a score of 3 on a 7-point scale (1 being 'extremely inefficient' and 7 'highly efficient').

Transparency International: Global Corruption Barometer 2009:
- Citizens give the judiciary a score of 4.4 on a 5-point scale (1 being 'not at all corrupt' and 5 'extremely corrupt').

- 64% of households surveyed consider the judiciary to be 'extremely corrupt'.

- 25% of households who had contact with the judiciary in 2008 report to have paid a bribe

Latinobarómetro: Annual Report 2008 (see English version):
- 47% of respondents in this public opinion survey believe that it is possible to bribe a judge in order to get a favourable sentence.

Miller & Chevalier: Latin America Corruption Survey 2008:
- 90% of the business leaders surveyed believe the judiciary to be significant corrupt.

Proética: Quinta Encuesta Nacional de Corrupción 2008 (in Spanish):
- 81% of the households surveyed perceive the judiciary system to be 'corrupt' or 'very corrupt'.

- 65% of users of the courts report that processes within the judicial system (e.g. trial, extension of licences and permits, etc) are faster when a bribe is paid to the judicial personnel.

The World Bank & IFC: Enterprise Surveys 2006:
- 12.3% of companies surveyed believe the court system is fair, impartial and uncorrupted.

- 20% of companies surveyed identify the functioning of the courts as a major business constraint.