Peru - AI Use as Aggravating Circumstance (32314/2025)

Overview

Law No. 32314, published in the official gazette El Peruano on 29 April 2025, modifies the Peruvian Penal Code (Decreto Legislativo 635) and Law No. 30096 (Law on Computer Crimes) to incorporate the use or misuse of artificial intelligence (AI) and analogous technologies as aggravating circumstances for crimes. The law was approved by Congress (signature sent to the President on 22 April 2025), promulgated by the President of the Republic on 28 April 2025, and entered into force upon its publication in El Peruano on 29 April 2025. The statutory changes add AI or "tecnologías similares o análogas" to the list of aggravating circumstances in the general part of the Penal Code and amend multiple substantive articles to increase penalties where AI is used in the commission of offenses. The law also mandates that the Executive branch issue complementary implementing norms within sixty (60) calendar days of entry into force to enable operational enforcement and clarify procedural and evidentiary aspects. (El Peruano — LEY N° 32314 (Official text, 29 Apr 2025))

Definitions

The text of Law No. 32314 does not create a standalone definitional section for "artificial intelligence." Instead, the amendments repeatedly reference the terms "inteligencia artificial" and "tecnologías similares o análogas" within amended articles. The statutory language intentionally employs broad phrasing to capture a wide set of automated generation and manipulation techniques, including but not limited to deepfakes, synthetic voice reproduction, image and video generation or alteration, and other content produced or altered by automated or algorithmic means. This approach aims to encompass present and foreseeable AI techniques without limiting coverage to specific technical methods. The law therefore treats AI and analogous technologies as an aggravating circumstance by reference in relevant penal provisions rather than by a detailed technical definition. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Governance and Institutional Framework

Responsibility for issuing the additional regulatory and procedural norms necessary to operationalize Law No. 32314 is assigned to the Executive branch. The Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM) and the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights are specifically identified as central actors called upon to coordinate and produce complementary rules within sixty (60) calendar days from the law's entry into force. Those implementing norms are expected to address investigative procedures, evidence-handling standards, chain-of-custody rules for digital and AI-generated content, and other technical-adjudicative protocols necessary for prosecution and adjudication. At the operational level, public prosecutors, police cyber-units, forensic units and courts are the primary institutions responsible for detecting, attributing and adjudicating AI-enabled wrongdoing; they are expected to develop or access specialized technical capacity (digital forensics, AI expertise) and to adopt evidentiary practices adapted to synthetic and manipulated content. The law itself is punitive in nature and does not create new affirmative compliance duties for private actors within its text, but the Executive's implementing norms may clarify procedural obligations or cooperation expectations for platforms, intermediaries and service providers. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Key Focus Areas

• Incorporation of AI as an aggravating circumstance: Modifies Article 46 of the Penal Code (circumstances of aggravation and mitigation) by adding misuse of AI and use of AI in the commission of punishable acts (new literal ñ and amendments to literal e).
• Targeted substantive offenses: Amends several Penal Code articles, including 129-M (child pornography and sexual-exploitation images), 132 (defamation), 196-A (aggravated fraud by voice/image synthesis), and articles 217–220-C (copyright and related rights offences), to increase penalties where AI or similar technologies are employed.
• Computer crimes sentencing enhancement: Amends Article 11 of Law No. 30096 (Law on Computer Crimes) to permit judges to increase sentences by up to one third where AI or analogous technologies are used.
• Child-protection emphasis: Covers AI-generated sexual content involving minors (including deepfakes), increasing criminal exposure for possession, production, distribution or promotion of such content.
• Fraud and identity-synthesis risks: Addresses aggravated fraud produced by synthetic voice or image manipulation aimed at deceiving victims (financial or other harms).
• Intellectual property enforcement: Expands penalties for AI-enabled reproduction, evasion of technological protection measures, distribution of tools or services that facilitate infringement, and other aggravated IP offences.
• Evidence and forensics: Emphasizes need for technical-adjudicative capacity to detect, attribute and prove AI-enabled wrongdoing; signals heightened evidentiary scrutiny in prosecutions involving synthetic content.
• Executive implementation: Mandates the Executive to issue complementary regulations within sixty (60) calendar days to operationalize investigation and enforcement.

Implementation Framework

Law No. 32314 requires concrete implementation actions by the Executive to ensure enforceability. The Presidency of the Council of Ministers and the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights are directed to prepare and issue implementing norms within sixty (60) calendar days of the law's entry into force, to clarify investigative procedures, standards for digital evidence, and the roles and responsibilities of public agencies in AI-related prosecutions. Prosecutors and law-enforcement agencies must adapt investigative workflows to preserve chain of custody for AI-generated materials, engage technical experts to analyze synthetic media, and coordinate with judicial authorities to present admissible forensic evidence. While the statutory amendments increase criminal exposure for malicious AI uses, the law itself does not prescribe detailed technical obligations for private-sector platforms; however, affected entities should expect increased cooperation requests from authorities and should prepare by updating moderation, retention and incident-response protocols to facilitate lawful investigations. The implementing rules to be issued by the Executive are anticipated to provide procedural guidance, evidentiary criteria and administrative coordination mechanisms necessary for consistent application of the new aggravating provisions. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Monitoring and Evaluation

The statutory text does not establish a dedicated monitoring or evaluation body specifically for the law's application. Monitoring and evaluation of enforcement and practical effects will therefore be implicit in ordinary institutional processes: prosecutorial case statistics, judicial sentencing data, executive reporting tied to the promulgation of implementing norms, and public oversight by relevant ministries and parliamentary committees. The sixty-day Executive deadline for issuing implementing norms creates an early milestone whose fulfillment (and the content of those norms) will be a primary indicator of timely implementation. Civil-society commentary, requests for guidance by industry and professional associations, and the operational readiness of forensic and prosecutorial units will serve as practical measures of implementation effectiveness. Prosecutors, courts and agencies will need to collect and analyze case-level data on the use of AI in criminal matters, sentencing outcomes where the aggravating circumstance is applied, and any procedural or evidentiary challenges encountered so that adjustments can be recommended through regulatory or legislative means. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Penalties, Liability, and Appeals

The law makes the malicious use of AI or analogous technologies an aggravating factor that increases criminal exposure and sentencing ranges for several offences. Notable penalty changes reflected in the amended text include: Article 129-M (child pornography using AI or deepfakes) — imprisonment not less than six nor more than ten years plus 120–365 días-multa; Article 132 (defamation via AI-generated content) — imprisonment between one and three years plus fines; Article 196-A (aggravated fraud realized via AI-based voice or image manipulation) — imprisonment between four and eight years plus fines; and expanded prison ranges and fines for certain copyright-related offenses (articles 217–220-C), including sanctions for evading technological protection measures or distributing tools/services that facilitate such evasion. Separately, the amendment to Article 11 of Law No. 30096 permits judges to increase an applicable sentence by up to one third where AI or similar technologies were employed in the commission of the offence. The law preserves general procedural and constitutional protections under Peruvian law, including rights of defense and ordinary appellate remedies; affected parties retain the right to challenge convictions and sentences through the established judicial appeal channels. The precise operationalization of liability concepts, assessment of aggravating weight and interaction with alternative sanctions will depend in part on the Executive's implementing norms and subsequent judicial interpretation. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Relationship to Other Instruments

Law No. 32314 interacts with existing Peruvian criminal and digital-era statutes. It expressly amends provisions of the Penal Code (Decreto Legislativo 635) and Law No. 30096 on Computer Crimes (as amended) and complements broader national initiatives relevant to AI, child protection and digital policy. The law should be read alongside other national instruments such as Law No. 31814 (national AI policy-promoting law) and any future Executive regulations that implement AI policy or procedural norms. Prosecutors and courts will need to reconcile the aggravating treatment under Law No. 32314 with pre-existing special statutory frameworks and procedural rules applicable to sexual-image offences, fraud, intellectual property protection, and computer crimes. The Executive's implementing rules are expected to clarify interactions and any necessary procedural harmonization across these instruments. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

International Alignment

Although Law No. 32314 is a national criminal-law instrument focused on Peru, its subject matter intersects with international commitments and global policy trends concerning the protection of minors, cybercrime, intellectual property and responsible AI use. The law's emphasis on aggravating treatment for AI-enabled child-exploitation content, fraud and IP infringement corresponds with international norms that prioritize child-protection and the rule of law in digital environments. Peru's approach of capturing broad categories of AI or analogous technologies mirrors precautionary statutory techniques adopted in other jurisdictions to ensure legal coverage over rapidly evolving technical methods. The law does not itself amend Peru's treaty obligations but domestic enforcement and implementation may be informed by international best practices and guidance from multilateral bodies regarding evidence preservation, cross-border cooperation and digital forensics. ([busquedas.elperuano.pe](https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/api/visor_html/2394851-2))

Implementation Timeline

Sources and References