Popular Renewal deputy Aldo Bravo assured that he will not withdraw his bill that proposes to penalize the so-called “apology of crime” during situations of political crisis and social conflicts, despite the criticisms of the National Association of Journalists (ANP), which considers that the initiative could affect freedom of expression and the practice of journalism.
In statements to RPP Noticias, Bravo rejected that his proposal intends to criminalize journalistic coverage of protests and stated that he is willing to meet later with representatives of the ANP and the Press and Society Institute (IPYS) to explain the scope of the initiative.
The legislator also said that he recently spoke with the dean of the College of Journalists of Peru, Andrés Zúñiga, who — according to him — told him that he did not find a violation of freedom of expression in the bill.
Deputy Aldo Bravo stated on @RPPNoticias that he will not withdraw his bill that seeks to penalize the apology of crime.
Also, there was a tense moment when he suggested that “all journalists” should be registered
👇🏻 pic.twitter.com/4C2AOlsiMT— 🎯Alejandra López (@aleptica) August 20, 2026
“I will not withdraw it under any circumstances”
Bravo was emphatic in stating that he will maintain his initiative and questioned that it is interpreted as a threat against the press. “I will not withdraw the bill under any circumstances. This bill has nothing to do with coercion”, he said.
He explained that the proposal would not be specifically aimed at journalists, but at people with the capacity for public mobilization who use any means of communication or digital platform to promote or justify the commission of certain crimes.
“It is aimed at anyone who has the capacity for public mobilization, an official, public servant, representative, leader and/or political leader,” he assured.
The legislator said that the initiative seeks to sanction those who, through any platform, “promote, indicate, justify, attempt to legitimize” the commission of crimes through the use of explosive devices, incendiary substances, dangerous substances or other methods that may affect people’s lives.
“Where is freedom of expression, for God’s sake?” Bravo questioned while defending the content of his proposal.
Read more Do you take B Complex? These are the types of vitamin B that exist and what they are for
The legislator’s statements come after the ANP warned that terms used in the bill, such as “justify,” “legitimize” or “generate a risk,” could have a broad interpretation and end up covering protected journalistic content.
The journalistic guild also questioned that the use of media and digital platforms appears as an aggravating factor and that the initiative explicitly mentions communicators and opinion leaders.
The ANP has argued that reporting on violent events, reproducing statements, collecting testimonies or covering social conflicts does not equate to promoting violence and requested that any legislation expressly establish that difference to avoid self-censorship effects.
Defending our peace and citizen security does not mean “over-penalizing” illegal behaviors that are already typified in our penal code such as instigation and apology of crime. Nor does it mean attacking freedom of the press, opinion and the…
— KatherineAmpueroMeza (@kampueromeza) August 19, 2026
Bravo’s initiative also received criticism from his own political group. Popular Renewal senator Katherine Ampuero questioned the bill through a post on X and stated that the fight against insecurity should not imply an unnecessary expansion of the punitive power of the State.
“Defending our peace and citizen security does not mean ‘over-penalizing’ illegal behaviors that are already typified in our Penal Code such as instigation and apology of crime,” she wrote.
Ampuero also warned that new regulation could end up affecting freedom of the press and opinion, as well as the principle of legality, and generate the risk of abusive exercise of rights by prosecutors and judges.
