[ad_1]
The Investigation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice inadmissible a complaint filed by the president of the network of Citizen Veedurías, Pablo Bustos, against senator Angélica Lozano.
Bustos had denounced her because on April 18 she went out to market together with her wife, the mayor of Bogotá, Claudia López, despite the fact that according to a regulation issued by the District, only one person per family can go out to this type of activities.
(It may interest you: Video controversy of Claudia López and Angélica Lozano in the supermarket)
In evaluating the case, the Court’s Investigative Chamber considered that the fact “It is not criminally relevant and does not represent a danger,” since it did not involve the spread of the virus on its own.
In addition, the Court said, with a presentation by Judge Marco Antonio Rueda, there is another mechanism to sanction this conduct, such as the fine that was imposed on Lozano for violating the restrictive measure due to the coronavirus pandemic.
“In the legal system, there are indeed other mechanisms to sanction the transgression of a sanitary measure with insignificance to promote the exercise of criminal prosecution; inclusive, those less damaging to fundamental rights and also useful for the desired objectives, specifically, the sanction of a pecuniary nature, ”said the Court.
(Read: Investigation is launched against Claudia López after trading in company)
Bustos had also asked in his complaint to inquire about “the sexual orientation of the senator (…) in order to determine which of the two was authorized to leave on the even day “, taking into account the peak and gender decree that was in force in Bogotá at that time.
On this point, the Supreme Court rejected Bustos’s request, since he stated that “in a State that respects freedom of expression and the free development of personality, examining the sexual orientation of citizens implies arbitrary and disproportionate interference in the exercise of liberties contained in the Political Charter ”.
This decision of the Supreme Court contrasts with the measure taken by the Attorney General’s Office that, on April 27, announced that it opened a preliminary investigation against Mayor López for the alleged violation of the sanitary measure.
That decision of the Prosecutor’s Office was strongly criticized by experts and jurists who considered it to be an exaggerated measure, since there was no merit in elevating their conduct to a criminal or criminal level.
JUSTICE
