[ad_1]
After the prosecutor, Gabriel Jaimes, requested before Judge 30 with the function of control of guarantees, the freedom of former senator Álvaro Uribe Vélez, prosecuted for alleged manipulation of witnesses, there was a clash between the delegate of the Prosecutor’s Office and the former head of the bunker Eduardo Montealegre, who requested to be declared as a victim in the process.
Montealegre began his intervention arguing that he was requesting that the former senator be denied freedom, however, in the framework of his story he referred to Jaimes and the lawyer Jaime Granados, with words that culminated in a scuffle and a call for attention by the judge .
“The interventions of the legal philosopher Gabriel Jaimes and the lawyer Jaime Granados Peña are based, these arguments on fallacies, sophistry, on distortion of the precedent and also include manifest violations of constitutional principles and values,” said the former head of the bunker.
Faced with such allegations, Granados, who defends the interests of former Senator Uribe, requested before the judge of guarantees respect by Montealegre, within the framework of the diligence that was carried out in a virtual way and that completed more than ten hours.
Montealegre asked the judge to “say what I should suppress from my references and observations to the lawyer Granados and the legal philosopher Jaimes, in order not to incur in improper conduct. He asked him to tell me how I am disrespectful ”.
For the judge, who on more than one occasion drew the attention of the jurists, assured that such statements by Montealegre can lead to misunderstandings. “In a linguistic expression, none of the words and expressions that you have used can be understood in any direct way as pejorative or disrespectful, but naturally, in the context in which you are doing it, alluding to the fact that you are referring to the position of the lawyer Jaime Granados and the legal philosopher Gabriel Jaimes, I think they can give rise to misunderstandings ”, said judge 30.
Jaimes, for his part, stated that in the middle of a diligence the arguments can be attacked but not the people who are part of it. “We have listened very patiently to the arguments, of course, excessive expressions full of irony that have no place in judicial settings. Justice, which is real justice, deserves respect, not only the undersigned, the audience, the country that is watching it, the judge, this administration of justice deserves respect and identity. Attack whatever the arguments want, this is how the right is exercised in the hearings.
For his part, Granados caught the attention of the former attorney general and made strong remarks about the way he should behave in the framework of a judicial hearing. “As the prosecutor I have exercised the patience that, as these gray hairs give one to bring the intemperance of some people who are not capable of distinguishing the arguments of something else.”
Granados assured that he does not feel disrespected because Montealegre called him a lawyer, on the contrary, he considered that any denomination that is made cannot be dishonorable on the work that lawyers do, however, what in his opinion seems “unconvinced” is not it is the expression as such, but the way of expressing it.
The criminal lawyer spoke about his work in court hearings and considered that this experience is what Montealegre lacks. “The way to conduct oneself in an audience implies decorum, respect. All the arguments he wants, all the strength and the dialectic that enrich a debate, but people are not touched, by an elementary courtesy, even if it costs him work, Montealegre lawyer, respect people ”.
Once the impasse was overcome, the procedure continued, however, with another setback in it, again by former prosecutor Montealegre, who brought up the similarity between the process of the former FARC combatant, Jesús Santrich and that of the Uribe case. . The former head of the bunker mentioned it because the parties did so in the process.
“In this case, Mr. Álvaro Uribe Vélez was deprived of his liberty on absolutely legal, constitutional grounds in accordance with article 29 of the Constitution, then he cannot be summoned as the constitutionalist Gabriel Jaimes does and as the lawyer Granados Peña does, to compare the process with the case of Jesús Santrich, as we are dealing with it (…) it turns out that the proposals that the defense Gabriel Ramón Jaimes and Jaime Granados, Uribe’s defense, are making, these proposals have in the background … ”, Highlighted Montealegre, which generated a new pronouncement from Jaimes.
The prosecutor in the case did not reproach Montealegre for bringing up the similarity between the processes of the former senator and the former FARC combatant, but rather the fact that he had put the Prosecutor’s Office as a “defense” of Uribe Vélez.
“The expression of Dr. Montealegre in the sense that the Prosecutor’s Office is Mr. Uribe’s defender, of course, are disrespectful,” said Jaimes.
The judge, in a last call for attention, assured that the legal debate given in the framework of the judicial proceeding is disrespecting not only people, but also institutions.
“I believe that a situation is really being presented that is extremely regrettable and that is that in a debate that is preached by great legal personalities and legal professionals of this country, situations of this nature are being presented that may lead to understanding that it is not being preaching respect in front of people or institutions ”, the judge assured.
The rifirrafe was registered during the almost 12 hours that complete the diligence in which the purpose of Uribe’s defense is to recover his freedom. However, it should be remembered that the former senator, who is prosecuted for the crimes of bribery and procedural fraud, was detained in his place of residence, since last August 3, at the Hacienda El Ubérrimo in Córdoba, and was reported as the prisoner number 1087985 by the National Penitentiary and Prison Institute (Inpec).
Uribe was reviewed eight days after the Investigation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice ordered his arrest. The determination was made while he had competence to investigate the former president, since he served as a member of the Congress of the Republic, however, as a play in his process, after resigning from the seat, his process was left in the hands of the Attorney General’s Office.
Despite this, the former senator, last August, became one of the 72,473 prisoners that Inpec has registered at home in jail, after the high court in its preliminary investigation found him as a “determiner of punishable behavior.” The Court stated that there is “circumstantial evidence against him that is abundant, clear, unequivocal and conclusive” in the acts allegedly committed.
THE PROSECUTOR’S REQUEST
Jaimes, who was attacked by various comments by former prosecutor Montealegre, on Thursday morning, asked the judge for the former senator’s release.
The delegate of the accusing body made it clear that his request is not a “prelude” to what will be the investigation process against the former president. On the contrary, he assured that there will be speed in the case, there will be no impunity, there will be justice and law.
“The investigation does not start from scratch. The large amount of evidence collected is not dismissed, but by virtue of the change in the penal system, it has become material evidence, legally obtained physical evidence, which will be reviewed in the light of the chain of custody and incorporation of evidence, to be legally valued in the face of an imputation formulation, ”argued prosecutor Jaimes.
Regarding the request for release, the prosecutor made his arguments clear. It stated that “assimilating the investigation to the formulation of the accusation is affecting and damaging the accusatory criminal system.”
According to Jaimes, for the Prosecutor’s Office it is evident that there is “procedural incompatibility” in the event that the investigation is endorsed as an imputation of charges, in Law 906. In his opinion, “it would violate the right of due process, if in in the present case we will move forward in the same procedural court ”.
Jaimes made it clear that since there is no imputation course, there is no starting point for an assurance measure. The prosecutor, who intervened after Uribe’s defense, joined his arguments to ask for his freedom.
WHAT THE DEFENSE SAID
For Granados, Uribe must regain his freedom because now the file is supplied by Law 906 of 2004, and this is not similar to the one that was advanced in the Supreme Court, Law 600 of 2000.
Granados assured that the process in law 600 was in the investigation stage, and allowed for a preventive detention, however, in his thesis, he assured that for the security measure against Uribe to be in force, a hearing of formulation of charges, under the current criminal procedure.
“There are precedents that allow conclusions to be drawn. There must be an outline for the formulation of the imputation, that is, an act of communication in the presence of a constitutional judge, in the process of law 906, this has not been registered, ”said Granados, while adding that“ as a indictment does not have to be deprived of liberty. The assurance measure of Law 600 to 906 cannot be homologated ”.
For the criminal prosecutor it is clear that he will only be able to shelter himself from an assurance measure when charges have been filed before a constitutional judge, otherwise the right to due process would be violated.
It is worth mentioning that at the end of this article, the diligence continues with the argument of former Deputy Prosecutor Jorge Perdomo, who also sought to be declared a victim, and request that the former senator be denied his freedom.
[ad_2]
