|Summary:||Between 2014 and 2015, 19 of 25 Peruvian regional authorities were being investigated for activities related to corruption. At the end of 2018, 10 of the 19 involved were tried with custodial sentences as a result of their illegal actions. But, despite this apparent effectiveness at the judicial level, certain cases with a significant number of reports and a similar background to those convicted escaped the sentences against them.Thus, the question addressed in this paper is: what variables explain the evasion of effective sentences in processes linked to corruption by subnational governments? The investigation focuses on the figure of the regional governor (formerly regional president), the crimes for which is accused and the judicial outcome between 2015 and 2018. For this, a comparative study of Tumbes and Callao cases was made, which share interesting similarities such as the imputed crimes, lack of a significant budget and the absence of media nationalization during 2014 and later years.The results of the investigation show the presence of two variables: state efficiency and the sophistication of criminal network. The combination of both is what distinguishes judicial differences in both cases, highlighting how can be generalized and analyzed for the creation of policies in favor of the fight against corruption.|
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).