TOXIC SOVEREIGNTY AND SYSTEMIC CORRUPTION: AN ULTRA-REALIST PERSPECTIVE ON PERU AND SPAIN

Abstract

This article offers a comparative analysis of systemic corruption in Peru and Spain, examining its impact on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through an ultra-realist criminological perspective. Using a mixed-methods design, the study triangulates quantitative survey data with qualitative interviews from key institutional actors to explore the structural, economic, and cultural dynamics that sustain corruption. In both contexts, corruption appears not as an occasional deviation but as a normalized institutional practice that produces significant social harm and erodes democratic legitimacy.

The research incorporates theoretical frameworks such as Hall and Winlow’s ultra-realism and Tudor’s toxic sovereignty to explain how state power becomes instrumentalized in favor of private interests. While Spain exhibits a more technocratic and institutionally safeguarded perception of corruption, Peru reflects a more visceral and socially embedded experience marked by institutional fragility.

Despite these contextual differences, both countries display shortcomings in integrating critical criminology into anti-corruption policies, signaling the need for systemic reform. The study proposes a multidimensional framework involving legal reform, institutional strengthening, civic education, and transnational cooperation, aligning anti-corruption measures with broader goals of equity, sustainability, and democratic resilience.