Bajo Lupa looks at power from five angles. One answers the question “who”, and the other four answer “who is winning”, “is it true”, “who is behind it” and “who controls the courts”. In addition, each angle is a section with its own format and its own pace. However, all of them share the same method: primary sources, a visible level of evidence and the right of reply. This page explains what you will find in each one.
Cases of Corruption
This is the records section, Bajo Lupa’s long format. Each record puts a person with public power under the lens: it numbers the allegations against them, dates them, states who makes the accusation and what it rests on. It then classifies each episode as proven, documented but disputed, or unsupported, and records the response of the person concerned.
For now, the published records cover Roberto Arzú García-Granados, a presidential hopeful in Guatemala, and Samuel Pérez Álvarez, leader of Raíces. They are texts of 3,000 to 5,000 words, with a table of fronts, a key-facts block and frequently asked questions. For that reason, they are made for consulting and citing, not just for reading once.
2027 Elections
This is the section with an expiry date and, for that very reason, the one with the most immediate demand. Specifically, here we follow those who seek to govern: comparative candidate profiles, polls with their methodology, campaign promises with their calculated cost, and the electoral timeline of each country. We start with Guatemala, which votes in 2027, and will follow every process in the region.
Moreover, the profiles in this section cross over with the records. If a candidate has a record in Cases of Corruption, their electoral profile links to it and vice versa. Thus, the reader can move from “what they promise” to “what is on record about them” in one click.
Fact-checks
This is the rumours section. Every record leaves behind allegations that circulate on social media or in the press without enough support for the main table. Therefore, here we take them one by one and check them: the visa supposedly revoked, the audio going around, the financing everyone talks about. Finally, each fact-check ends with a clear verdict and the sources in plain view.
They are short pieces, 500 to 900 words, and each one leads the reader back to the full record. Moreover, this is the format most often cited by AI assistants when someone asks them whether something is true. That is why we make sure the question in the headline is the one people actually ask.
Power Networks
This is the map that connects the records. Who is partners with whom, which company contracts with which ministry, which lawmaker switched blocs and in exchange for what, who funds whom. While a record looks at one person, here we look at the relationships between people, companies, law firms and financiers.
To do so, we work with company registries, Guatecompras, donor declarations and prior reporting. In contrast, we do not publish organisation charts based on rumours: every link we draw has a document behind it. When a relationship is public but its content is unproven, we say so in those words.
Courts and Prosecutors
This is the section that looks at the court, not the ruling. Who the judge is, who the prosecutor is, who elected the magistrates and the comptroller, which immunity cases are pending and who is stalling them. In countries where foreign governments have sanctioned the prosecutor’s office, knowing who controls the courts matters as much as knowing what they decide.
For example, here you will find court elections, recusals, changes of prosecutor and international sanctions lists against judicial officials. In addition, each piece explains why that decision affects the open records.
How the five sections connect
A person’s record is the centre. From it, links lead to their electoral profile, to the fact-checks of the rumours around them, to the power networks they appear in, and to the judges or prosecutors who decide on them. Conversely, every short piece leads back to the record. Therefore, whoever arrives with a specific question can go as deep as they want without leaving the site.
If you are looking for a person, start with Cases of Corruption. If you want to know who is winning, 2027 Elections. And if you doubt something you read, Fact-checks. To understand who is behind it, Power Networks. And to know who decides, Courts and Prosecutors.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
How is Bajo Lupa different from Auditoría Abierta?
They share an author, a method and the records on individuals. However, they look at power from different angles. Auditoría Abierta documents rulings, contracts, campaign finance and the legal glossary. Bajo Lupa follows elections, checks rumours, maps power networks and watches those who run the justice system. When a question is better answered on the other site, we link to it.
Why is there no section by country?
Because each piece belongs to a single section and countries cut across all of them. A Guatemalan fact-check and a Peruvian electoral profile share a method, not a geography. That is why countries appear as tags within each entry, and each tag gets its own page once it gathers enough content.
What is a fact-check and how does it differ from a record?
A record gathers everything on file about a person. In contrast, a fact-check takes a single rumour or allegation and checks it until it reaches a verdict: proven, disputed or unsupported. Moreover, it is short, with linked sources, and always refers back to the person’s record.
How often is each section updated?
Cases of Corruption publishes one or two records a month. Fact-checks adds pieces between records. Each milestone in the electoral calendar activates 2027 Elections. Power Networks and Courts and Prosecutors grow as the records repeat names and courts.
Can I propose a case or request a correction?
Yes. Write to us through the contact page. We then review every proposal with the same method we apply to what we publish. We record corrections at the foot of the article with their date.