Former president of Paraguay arrested after impeachment

Santiago Peña lost Paraguay’s presidency and was arrested on the same night. The Senate unanimously approved his removal after a political crisis linked to the Ueno Bank. His vice president, Pedro Alliana, took office while police detained Peña in his residence in Asunción. The events connected a political defeat directly to a criminal investigation.

Police acted under a detention order issued as part of the Ueno Bank investigation. Peña had been a shareholder in a company linked to the bank until 2025. Opposition lawmakers accused him of a conflict of interest and of favoring the institution. He had announced his resignation, but Congress continued the impeachment process.

After losing office, Peña no longer had the presidential immunities associated with the position. Authorities could therefore execute the arrest order. He cooperated with police and said he would submit to the process. He was scheduled to appear before prosecutors on Saturday, after which a court would decide possible precautionary measures.

Impeachment is a formal political process that can remove a president for alleged misconduct or serious violations of public duties. It is separate from an ordinary criminal trial. Legislators examine accusations, debate the case, and vote. If the required chamber approves removal, the president loses office. The exact procedures depend on a country’s constitution and laws.

In Peña’s case, the opposition presented an impeachment request. It accused him of a conflict of interest and of favoring Ueno Bank. Peña announced his resignation, saying he wanted to preserve national stability, but Congress continued the political judgment. On Friday, Paraguay’s Senate approved his removal unanimously.

The Senate’s decision ended Peña’s presidency and removed the immunities connected to that office. It did not itself establish criminal guilt. Prosecutors were still investigating possible crimes, and Peña retained the right to defend himself. Courts would later assess the legal consequences and decide whether he should remain detained.

Peña was arrested because prosecutors are investigating possible crimes connected to the Ueno Bank crisis. The allegations include breach of trust, influence peddling, and using public office for personal benefit. These are initial suspicions, not convictions. The investigation must still examine evidence and allow Peña to present his defense.

The case began when Paraguay’s Central Bank started closing Ueno Bank because of financial problems. The bank’s service interruption affected almost three million customers. Suspicion also focused on Peña because he had been a shareholder in a company linked to Ueno Bank until 2025. The opposition described this as a possible conflict of interest and favoritism.

Police carried out a detention order at Peña’s home after the Senate removed him. He cooperated and allowed officers inside. He was due to appear before prosecutors on Saturday. After questioning, the courts were expected to consider precautionary measures and decide whether he would remain detained.

Almost three million customers were affected when Ueno Bank’s banking services were interrupted. That figure shows why the bank’s financial problems became a national crisis rather than a narrow corporate issue. Service failures disrupted access to banking for a very large share of the institution’s customers and contributed to public anger.

The crisis began when Paraguay’s Central Bank started the process of closing Ueno Bank because of financial problems. The interruption led to a wave of protests across the country. It also raised questions about possible official involvement, because Peña had been a shareholder in a company linked to the bank until 2025.

The customer impact remains central to the investigation and political fallout. Opposition lawmakers used the situation to seek Peña’s impeachment, alleging a conflict of interest and favoritism. The Senate removed him, and prosecutors are now examining possible crimes. Courts will assess the evidence and determine his next legal measures.

The key legal change was the end of Peña’s presidential immunities. While he held office, those protections affected how authorities could act against him. Once the Senate removed him, the protections ended. The article says this enabled the Justice to carry out the detention order issued in the Ueno Bank investigation.

The sequence was rapid. Peña announced his resignation on Thursday, but Congress continued the impeachment proceeding. On Friday, the Senate unanimously approved his removal. As Pedro Alliana took office, police went to Peña’s residence in Asunción and detained him under the existing order.

Losing office did not make Peña criminally guilty. He remained under investigation for suspected breach of trust, influence peddling, and using office for personal benefit. He cooperated with police and was scheduled to appear before prosecutors. After his statement, the courts would decide precautionary measures and whether he remained detained.

Each institution had a different role. Paraguay’s Central Bank began the process of closing Ueno Bank because of financial problems. The Senate handled the political judgment against Peña and unanimously approved his removal. Prosecutors investigated suspected crimes and planned to question him. The courts handled the detention order and would decide later precautionary measures.

The mechanism unfolded in stages. Bank-service interruptions affected almost three million customers and caused protests. The crisis raised questions about Peña’s possible conflict of interest because he had been a shareholder in a company linked to Ueno Bank until 2025. The opposition then sought impeachment, alleging favoritism toward the institution.

The Senate’s action changed Peña’s legal position by ending his presidential immunities. Police could execute the detention order, while prosecutors continued gathering evidence. Peña remained legally unconvicted and could defend himself. After his questioning, the courts were expected to decide whether he would stay detained during the investigation.

Removal through impeachment and criminal conviction are different outcomes. Impeachment is a political process about whether a president should continue holding office. A criminal case is a judicial process about whether the person committed a crime. An official may lose office without being found criminally guilty, because the two proceedings use different rules and purposes.

That distinction appears clearly in Peña’s case. The Senate unanimously approved his removal after accusations of conflict of interest and favoritism involving Ueno Bank. The decision ended his presidency. Separately, prosecutors were investigating possible breach of trust, influence peddling, and use of office for personal benefit.

The article states that Peña had not been criminally convicted. He still had the right to present his defense while investigators examined the evidence. His loss of office removed his presidential immunities and allowed the detention order to be executed, but courts still had to assess precautionary measures and the criminal case.