The current uncertainty surrounding the outcome of the second round of elections It has stripped away old political and social burdens that we carry as a society. For some, this may seem obvious, but it is worth noting them in case the situation improves. Dreaming costs nothing.
Firstly, the State has failed. Indeed, the recent election day confirms this perception, especially because it is evident that this is a moment in which the State has a monopoly on action.
The balance is regrettable: the convalescent Peruvian democracy has suffered a relapse, caused by the logistical failures of the ONPE and the disdain and disdain with which its leaders faced the crisis. This diagnosis is completed by the erratic behavior of the JNE: where were the inspectors on Friday afternoon to warn of the delays in the arrival of voting material?
There is no shortage of conspiracy theories that see in these blunders a desire to distort the popular will. However, such interpretations lack serious evidence. Rather, they are State officials who acted, in the face of the emergency, with negligence, insensitivity and irresponsibility.
The other side of the coin is the laxity that many political actors have exhibited in relation to the law. Expectations, for example, regarding the annulment of the elections go in that direction. However, they should make it clear that they are just that: wishes. There is not a single correlation with the established legal framework that justifies such a decision or, even, the holding of complementary elections.
Fernando Rodríguez Patrón summed it up well on Tuesday morning in an interview with Fernando Carvallo and Mávila Huertas: “Those who support or encourage a partial or total nullity are simply expressing a wish” (RPP, 4/21/2026).
For this reason, the rumors circulating at the close of this column are worrying: the annulment, ex officio, by the plenary session of the JNE, of the elections in Metropolitan Lima. The eventual realization of a ‘legicide’ of this nature not only opens a Pandora’s box, but also sets a disastrous precedent for electoral processes to come. In that sense, Enrique Castillo is right when he states that “the remedy can be worse than the disease” (El Comercio, 4/19/2026).
Added to what was previously said is the activation of atavistic evils that, for some time now, have characterized Peruvian elections and that usually respond to social rather than political components: racism, stigmatization, intolerance and, recently, the foolishness of believing that several truths can coexist in the face of single facts.
It is often stated that a person is known when he obtains power; Likewise, to a democracy, because of the way it handles its elections. Today Peru is sick.
*El Comercio opens its pages to the exchange of ideas and reflections. In this plural framework, the Diario does not necessarily agree with the opinions of the columnists who sign them, although it always respects them.
