The accountability system set out by Article 99 and 100 of the Constitution of Peru is sui generis. It is twofold: on the one hand, it entails the possibility for the Congress to “impeach” certain high-ranking officials for so-called “constitutional offences” (“violation of the Constitution”) through a political process: the impeachment process allows the initiation of parliamentary proceedings against the officials listed in Article 99 of the Constitution, on the ground of constitutional infractions of a political nature committed by them in the exercise of their functions; if the responsibility of the official is determined, the Congress of the Republic itself is authorised to sanction him/her and even disqualify him/her from the exercise of the public function. On the other hand, and at the same time, the impeachment confers on the same high-ranking officials a functional prerogative, with the purpose of preventing them from being prosecuted for ordinary crimes committed in the exercise of their functions, without prior proceedings with the due process guarantees before the Congress of the Republic. The Peruvian interlocutors referred to the first as a “burden” and to the second as a “privilege”. These two procedures stem from the same provisions of the Constitution, Articles 99 and 100: the supporters of the reform stressed the “privilege” aspect, while the opposers stressed the “burden” aspect, but the two aspects cannot be dissociated from each other, because being subject to Article 99 means being subject to both juicio politico and ante juicio within the meaning of Article 100.