[ad_1]
September 13, 2020 – 07:13 pm
Newsroom of El País
This Wednesday, September 16, it is defined whether former senator Álvaro Uribe continues with house arrest for the crimes of bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud.
According to the defense, in the morning hours, in the courts of Paloquemao de Bogotá, it is expected that a guarantee control judge will define whether the former senator will continue his free process or with the assurance measure, imposed by the Supreme Court of Justice.
It should be mentioned that the former president has been deprived of his liberty since last August 12, at his El Ubérrimo farm, located in the department of Córdoba.
You can read: Government is in favor of a reform to the Police
Uribe’s lawyers will have to argue at the hearing why they believe that the former president, whose process passed from the Supreme Court of Justice to the Attorney General’s Office after resigning his seat as senator, can continue the process at liberty.
Álvaro Uribe’s defense stated that the decision of the Investigation Chamber was “unfounded and without precedent in the country’s justice system, it shows how the former president has been violated in this process six principles and legal rights enshrined in the Constitution of Colombia.”
The lawyer Jaime Granados assured that it was not necessary to issue an assurance measure more than two years after the process began and considered that this “has nothing preventive and sounds more vindictive.”
For its part, the Prosecutor’s Office will have to present its position on whether it considers that the insurance measure should be maintained or not.
In addition, it indicated that the decision was based on inferences since, according to Granados, in the record there would not be a single evidence or audio in which Uribe Vélez makes any reference to requesting that testimonies or offers of benefits be changed.
It should be remembered that Gabriel Ramón Jaimes Durán, prosecutor in charge of the case, was challenged by Senator Iván Cepeda. However, this challenge was unsuccessful.
[ad_2]