.jpg)
Peru’s latest decision to prolong the Integrated Registry for Mining Formalisation (Reinfo), a controversial scheme granting temporary permits to informal miners, is the clearest indication that the state has lost control over its primary tool for regulating small-scale mining. Despite nearly a decade of repeated extensions and minimal results, Congress has now approved another prolongation of the regime until December 31, 2027, a move defended by some lawmakers but widely denounced by business associations, technical experts and environmental specialists.
The Energy and Mines Commission endorsed the extension with 17 votes in favour, three against and one abstention, approving a text “con cargo a redacción”, meaning the final wording still remains unclear. This ambiguity has triggered further concern, as it allows sensitive provisions to be altered before the proposal reaches the plenary.
What distinguishes this latest expansion from previous ones is not just the additional two years, but the political struggle around the possible reinstatement of more than 50,000 Reinfo registrants removed in June for inactivity. Though congresswoman Patricia Juárez (Fuerza Popular) insisted that the decision “will not automatically” reintegrate them, other actors interpreted the draft differently. Gestión reported that representatives of the artisanal mining federation Confemin celebrated the vote precisely because they believe it opens the door for those exclusions to be overturned.
This lack of clarity is the result of a decade of systemic failures. Only 2% of the 87,000 operators ever registered have reached full formalisation, while 78% were suspended for administrative breaches or omissions. Even those who remained active advanced slowly: technical expert Iván Arenas told El Comercio that of the 31,000 miners that the state was supposed to formalise this year, only 64 actually completed the process.
The Reinfo’s dysfunction is no longer merely a matter of bureaucratic inefficiency. It has become a structural weakness feeding criminal economies. Peru’s illegal mining sector is now recognised as the country’s largest illicit industry, a point repeatedly emphasised by the country’s main business guilds. In a joint statement, 56 business associations—including Confiep, SNI and the SNMPE—warned that this extension “promotes illegality and puts the Peruvian industry and exports at risk.”
This warning reflects a broader pattern. Organised crime has expanded aggressively in regions where informal mining dominates, such as Madre de Dios, Pataz, Nasca and parts of the Amazon. In these areas, the boundary between informal and illegal operators has largely eroded. CONFIEP president Jorge Zapata told Canal N that the distinction between the two is now “difficult to determine”, as the same networks often operate under both labels while using the Reinfo as a façade.
The security implications are equally stark. In recent years, regions under intense informal mining activity have seen escalating violence, territorial disputes and the infiltration of criminal gangs. This trend was brutally illustrated in Pataz, where miners linked to the informal sector have been targeted, extorted or murdered by armed groups—an environment shaped by weak state enforcement and permissive regulation. The state’s persistent reliance on transitory regimes like the Reinfo has allowed these conditions to harden.
The new extension also places Peru in direct conflict with its international commitments. The Comunidad Andina (CAN) has repeatedly warned that the country risks trade consequences if it continues to provide regulatory shelter to operators involved in illegal activity. The Constitutional Court itself ruled in April that maintaining a transitory regime enabling “activities without control” violates the constitutional obligation to protect the environment.
Environmental specialists argue that the latest draft intensifies these contradictions. Lawyer César Ipenza told El Comercio that allowing the return of previously excluded miners amounts to “impunity”, as it reopens cases that were already deemed non-compliant. He stressed that the text even proposes halting suspension procedures against Reinfo-registered miners, effectively neutralising sanctions for environmental, tax or administrative violations.
Yet perhaps the most alarming development is the progressive political penetration of groups linked to informal and illegal mining. Technical expert Iván Arenas warned that numerous “Reinfo candidates” are now embedded in multiple parties ahead of the 2026 elections. Their influence is visible in Congress, where congressmen such as Víctor Cutipa—president of the Energy and Mines Commission—publicly supported the extension without modifications, as reported by El Comercio.
The political dynamics surrounding the vote further highlight institutional fragility. Gestión described the session as “chaotic”, with contradictory interpretations of the reincorporation clause and last-minute adjustments driven by Juárez to avoid the appearance of automatic reinstatement. Even legislators within the commission expressed confusion about what had actually been approved.
The prolonged survival of the Reinfo has entrenched a cycle in which thousands of operators delay compliance until the final months of each extension, then demand new prolongations. As CONFIEP noted, this pattern is likely to repeat in 2026 and 2027, leaving Peru trapped in a perpetual transitional regime with almost no incentive for miners to regularise their position.
By prolonging a mechanism that the state demonstrably cannot oversee, Congress has reinforced the very conditions that enable illegal economies to expand. Whether the plenary introduces stronger safeguards remains uncertain, but the structural reality remains: Peru’s regulatory apparatus is being outpaced, outmanoeuvred and increasingly overshadowed by mining networks that thrive in the grey zones of weak governance.
