Peru – Judicial remedy


3.1. General conclusions of the diagnosis and baseline

Thirdly, with respect to judicial and extrajudicial reparation mechanisms, positive changes have also been evidenced at the regulatory level. Thus, the State has adopted administrative, civil, and criminal penalties for breaches of human rights legislation in the business context. In addition, these reparation mechanisms have taken into account the human rights approach and complementary approaches. Despite these advances, the reparation of individuals and peoples for violations of their rights continues to face serious difficulties due to legal, procedural, and social barriers -mainly- for groups with special protection, which hinders their adequate access to justice. For example, it is evident that the investigative authorities do not have sufficient operational capacity to carry out their functions and judicial processes take years to be resolved. – page 40

Afro-Peruvian people

The problems faced by Afro-Peruvian people in relation to business activities are centered on four scenarios: (i) access to work, (ii) employability and work environment, (iii) consumer relations, and (iv) advertising and media. On this last point, the media play a fundamental role, since they construct and reproduce behavioral models, promote or omit certain discourses, and legitimize practices or subject them to public scrutiny. The Peruvian State has not yet implemented remediation and reparation mechanisms in favor of the Afro-Peruvian people in the face of human rights violations, beyond the declarative nature of the 2009 norm on historical forgiveness. – page 46

Indigenous peoples and prior consultation

With respect to mechanisms for redressing the rights of indigenous peoples, judicial remedies are the most commonly used, although they are slow and ineffective. There are also administrative ave- nues used, but it is noted that they are not designed to address the integrity of the damages caused, especially those resulting from informal activities and the criminal environment. Although strategic litigation by indigenous peoples and civil society has been a more efficient form of access to redress, this mechanism has been limited. – page 49

Judicial and extrajudicial reparation mechanisms

In the relationship between human rights and business, access to an effective remedy is a corners-
tone in the face of rights violations. There is a need to strengthen and develop the capacities of the bodies responsible for the procurement and administration of justice, as well as the oversight bodies
and extrajudicial mechanisms, with a gender and differential approach. The importance of this lies in
the fact that the reparation of human rights violations can have a dissuasive effect on the repetition
of similar situations. It is necessary to evaluate the possibility of expanding the catalog of crimes for
which criminal liability could be imposed on legal persons, in relation to human rights violations that
are characterized as crimes; as well as to assess the convenience of clarifying or making explicit the
rules of domestic law from which the liability of companies to prevent adverse impacts on human
rights is derived. – page 51

Private security

In terms of reparation mechanisms, the judicial system presents pre-existing barriers that affect access to justice, especially for the most vulnerable people, and therefore, access to judicial reparations. – page 51

Use of force and police agreements

For its part, the formal business sector has been incorporating complaint and grievance mechanisms within the framework of which security and human rights issues can be addressed, such as the Guide for Complaints and Grievances prepared by the SNMPE. Likewise, progress has been made in training on the subject with the formation of a working group. – page 52

Table 8: NAP strategic guidelines and objectives, and alignment with the axes of the Peru Vision 2050

Strategic guideline No. 2: Design of public protection policies to prevent human rights violations in the business environment.

Objective No. 3: Review, design, and adoption of national plans and programs to guarantee human rights in the framework of business activities.


Action: Execute training actions aimed at GORES officials on the guidelines of the procedure for the formalization of individual and collective land rights.

Background: The process of formalizing individual and collective land rights needs to be strengthened. To this end, it is necessary that MIDAGRI, through DIGESPACR, implement training actions aimed at GORES officials on the guidelines of
the formalization procedure under the approach of individual and collective human rights over land.

Indicator: GORES officials trained in the guidelines of the procedure for the formalization of individual and collective land rights. – page 82


Action: Promote the reduction of the land titling gap of rural properties, and of peasant and native communities at the level of the GORES.

Background/Indicator: The execution of the procedures for the Titling of rural properties, peasant communities, and native communities is the exclusive competence of the GORES and the steering role is exercised by the MIDAGRI through the General Directorate of Agrarian Property and Rural Cadastre (DIGESPACR), it, it is required to strengthen the mechanisms to continue promoting the process of formalization of individual and collective land rights, according to its competence. – page 84


Action: Expressly incorporate the GP-RBC approach in actions related to climate change, biological diversity, and environmental land use planning in the next National Environmental Action Plan and the National Environmental Policy.

Background: The issues of climate change, biological diversity, and environmental land-use planning should be expressly associated with the issue of business and human rights. In this way, related public policy measures would encourage companies to take into account the issues arising from these issues in their due diligence processes throughout the supply chain and address negative environmental risks and impacts.

Indicator: National Environmental Action Plan, including or expressly contemplating the GP-RBC approach in actions related to climate change, biological diversity, and environmental land use planning (Action Indicator). – page 85

Strategic guideline No. 5: Design and strengthening of mechanisms to ensure that those affected by human rights violations have access to judicial, administrative, legislative, or other means of redress.

Objective 1: Strengthen mechanisms at the state level to redress human rights violations in the corporate sphere.


Action: Promote regulatory modifications that guarantee suitable reparation mechanisms, in accordance with international standards.

Background: Establish mechanisms or commissions for the review of legislative frameworks and judicial and extrajudicial mechanisms, in line with the recommendations issued in the OHCHR Project on Access to Redress (A/HRC/32/19/Add.1, A/HRC/38/20/Add.1 and A/HRC/38/20/Add.1).

Indicator: Creation and Implementation of space for intersectoral sectoral coordination for the reviewing of legislative frameworks and judicial and extrajudicial mechanisms (Action Indicator). – page 120

Objective 2: Strengthen the judicial and extrajudicial systems to redress human rights violations in the corporate sphere.


Action: Produce and disseminate international standards on business and human rights through informative materials on judicial redress to strengthen the mechanisms for sanctioning and investigating human rights violations caused by business activities, aimed at judges, prosecutors, jurisdictional and fiscal assistance personnel.

Background: In order to provide accessible and useful tools that will enable judges, prosecutors, and judicial and prosecutorial staff to strengthen their work on reparations in the area of business activities, it is important to produce and disseminate informative guides and other similar documents that facilitate the application of international standards in judicial and prosecutorial work.

Indicator: Creation and dissemination of guides. – page 124


Action: To disseminate judicial and extrajudicial mechanisms for the protection of human rights in business activities.

Background: To make visible and disseminate the existing tools in the national legal framework and the experiences in terms of reparation in cases involving corporate responsibility for adverse impacts on human rights, including aspects such as the burden of proof.

Indicator: Report on activities for the dissemination of judicial and extrajudicial mechanisms implemented. – page 124