The Reality of Politics in Peru

For the last decade, Peru has had eight presidents, three of whom were impeached and two of whom resigned, and none of them served a full five-year term. These rapid transitions reveal the extreme instability of political power in Peru. Three driving forces of this unstable and chaotic political situation are multipartyism, citizen disengagement, and constitutional legislative conflict.

Multipartyism

Peruvian politics is based on a multi-party system, which has some advantages but serious drawbacks. Currently, there are 43 registered active political parties, and 37 candidates are running for the 2026 election. This multi-party system, unlike the two-party system in the United States, is commonly found across South America and Europe. Having a divergent political perspective means a wider range of ideologies and minority interests. The parties are broadly scattered along the political spectrum and allow voters to have more choice. Nonetheless, this system can lead to political fragmentation by scattering votes across over 40 parties in an election, preventing clear majorities and fueling unstable coalitions. For a country like Peru with a history of a high level of instability in politics, this multi-party system deepens it.

More importantly, due to a lack of cohesive dominant parties, the focus is more on the candidates with wealth and social status rather than on their policies, leading to the rise of populist authoritarian leaders (Levitsky). The fragmentation discussed above creates a space for the populist authoritarian leaders to exploit. While dozens of parties fail to come together to reunite the nation, citizens view the entire political system as corrupt and untrustworthy. Hence, some populist leaders take their stand as the “outsider” candidate, who position themselves against the entire political class. By framing the 'multi-party' chaos as a symptom of a corrupt elite, these leaders promise to bypass traditional institutions to deliver immediate, albeit often illiberal, solutions. One clear example is Alberto Fujimori, the former president of Peru, first elected in 1990. He ran against the famous Peruvian author, Mario Vargas Llosa, who represented the traditional white, European-leaning, liberal elite. By presenting himself to voters as "a president like you" (against the "corrupt" politicians), he won an unexpected victory. Once in power, however, his lack of a stable party in Congress led to his 1992 auto-golpe (self-coup), where he dissolved the legislature entirely (Pinchetti).

In order to reduce the country’s political fragmentation, Peru would be better off with fewer and more influential parties or by implementing a two-party system with the potential for broader coalitions and narrower majorities. For instance, the United Kingdom traditionally had a two-party system, but it transformed into a three-party system to offer more diverse representations. Consequently, the United Kingdom is facing serious government fragmentation, especially in 2024, with the decline of major party dominance. Given that a three-party system projects serious fragmentation in a country, a 43-party system cannot be the answer for a country like Peru enduring such high instability.

Citizen Disengagement

In Peru, voting is compulsory, and choosing not to vote imposes a fine of approximately 30 dollars, which is a significant amount for the working class. Consequently, citizens have shown a high level of participation of 70% (RPP). However, high participation does not necessarily mean citizens’ genuine interest in politics or an informed electorate.

According to a late 2025 opinion poll conducted by the Peru Support Group, approximately 71% of Peruvians reported having "little or no interest" in politics (PSS). This disinterest is rooted in the chronic corruption scandals involving multiple former presidents and politicians, and eroding trust in institutions.

On the other hand, even voters interested in politics are frequently misinformed or underinformed about the candidates. One shortcoming of having 35 options as the future president is that it is difficult to fully be aware of each candidate’s character, positions, and leadership. The challenge of voters not staying informed is exemplified by the leading 2026 presidential candidate, Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of Alberto Fujimori. While she benefits from the established political reputation of her father, many voters do not take into account the full implications of her policies. Her lead in the current poll highlights the trend where the electorate relies on name recognition and familiarity rather than the true value of a candidate.

According to a poll conducted by El Comercio, 57% of Peruvians with voting rights had not yet decided who to vote for at the time of the election. Fewer candidates and improving political education would help citizens make informed decisions rather than relying on name recognition.

Constitutional Legislative Conflict

Another major cause of political instability is the conflict between the executive and legislative branches. The balance of power in Peru has been broken for a long time. As the legislative branch gained its autonomy, the power of the executive and judicial branches became limited. The dominant Congress often marginalizes the president, creating a constitutional legislative conflict.

The conflict derives from the ‘impeachment of the Presidency of the Republic of Peru by declaration of permanent moral incapacity.’ Identifying a president’s ‘permanent moral incapacity’ is a process where a Congress member can declare a president’s moral incapacity and impeach them without any criminal charges. More recently, the broad scope of the procedure has given the Congress of Peru power over the executive branch. Modern former presidents, including Martin Vizcarra, Pedro Castillo, and Dona Boluarte, were impeached by the congress for permanent moral incapacity. The Congress still needs a two-thirds vote for impeachment, yet due to the multi-party system, the president’s party is a minority. Thus, this act efficiently makes the presidential position temporary, leading to the legislative branch’s dominance.

To limit Congress’s ability to impeach, one proposal could be to redefine the permanent moral incapacity law by clarifying the cause of impeachment as “evident mental or health issue” in order to prevent wrongful impeachment.

Conclusion

From systematic error to citizens’ disengagement, the political instability in Peru has grown into a crisis, the result of a self-reinforcing cycle of dysfunction. Multipartyism creates systematic fragmentation of the government and ushers in populist authoritarian leaders. Citizen disengagement leads to underinformed votes. Constitutional legislative conflict results in an unequal government system where one branch has excessive power. Peru’s political crisis is an issue that requires an imminent systematic reconstruction, starting with a constitutional change.