[ad_1]
The Plenary Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice rejected the challenge presented by Senator Iván Cepeda against Attorney General Francisco Barbosa, so that he would step aside in the process that the prosecuting body is now leading against former senator and former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez, investigated for alleged bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud.
The high court assured that the challenge of Cepeda ands “inappropriate” and said that the arguments he presented to try to remove Barbosa are “insufficient” because they do not correspond to any of the grounds that the law provides for challenging an official.
In addition, the Court assured, some of Iván Cepeda’s arguments are geared towards questioning other public servants and political activists, “which, in principle, is beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Justice. The connection of these alleged behaviors with the matter submitted to the Corporation is explained in the influence that these third parties could have on the challenged official.”
Regarding the questioning that Cepeda made about Barbosa, in the sense that he participated in Duque’s presidential campaign, the Court said that from the data that the Senator del Polo provided “it is not apparent that this participation is sufficient to prevent the official from challenged may adjust his behavior to the legal system “. And, with more reason, says the high court, “if one takes into account that the person under investigation is not the then presidential candidate, but another member of the respective party.”
It is not observed that this participation (in the presidential campaign) is sufficient to prevent the challenged official from adjusting his behavior to the legal system
The Court also noted that some of the risks that Cepeda pointed out “would be mitigated.” For example, he said, on the one hand the Attorney General is elected for a period provided for by law (four years) “so he can act with total autonomy, even against the public servants involved in his appointment,” which in this case would be President Iván Duque.
Second, the Plenary Chamber said, the criminal process is subject to specific rules that limit discretion in these cases. And thirdly, in Colombia – unlike other countries – there is the figure of the Public Ministry, which in these cases has broad powers “to control and intervene in criminal proceedings,” so those who are interested can request special surveillance of A case.
Also, the Court said, in Colombia victims have ample guarantees in criminal proceedings, in the sense that they can request the review of a process that ends up on file, oppose the preclusion of a case or a principle of opportunity, they can request evidence and request ordinary and extraordinary resources.
“In the Colombian criminal prosecution system, it is the judges who must decide on criminal responsibility and it is they who make the decision on the origin of the estoppel,” said the Court, to make clear that filing a case is not an autonomous decision of the Prosecutor’s Office.
(Also read: Jurists say that recusal against prosecutor Barbosa will not prosper).
And he added that “citizens must be careful of trying to transfer political debates to the judicial sphere, to avoid distorting the role of judges in society.”
According to the high court, when an official is challenged, the corporation’s competence is reduced solely to establishing whether “he is involved in some of the restrictive causes expressly provided for in the legal system.” This is why, the corporation said, although there may be political, social and other controls that correspond to judicial processes, those controls are outside the judge who must resolve the challenge.
Uribe was being investigated by the Investigation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice but, as after the high court resolved his legal situation and ordered his arrest at home in jail, the senator resigned, the high court established that he lost competence to continue investigating him . That is why he passed the file to the Attorney General’s Office.
(Also read: Former prosecutor Montealegre asks to be credited as a victim in the Uribe case).
Upon passing the case to the Prosecutor’s Office, Cepeda – considered a victim in this process – recused the Attorney General Barbosa, as well as the Deputy Attorney General Martha Mancera, and their delegates. According to Cepeda, these researchers do not offer guarantees to carry out the investigation, Among other reasons for his closeness to President Iván Duque and the Democratic Center party of Uribe.
(Also: Gabriel Jaimes, Ordóñez’s ex-right hand who will handle Uribe’s case)
However, the Attorney General had rejected that challenge and had asked the Supreme Court not to accept it, noting that there is no friendship or close relationship between him and Uribe that could affect the impartiality of the case. He also said that President Iván Duque has nothing to do with this, because he is not part of the process, and pointed out that what Cepeda was proposing was an almost institutional challenge, just because he was the Attorney General.
(Read: Former senator Álvaro Uribe’s freedom must be decided by a judge).
Now, with the decision of the Supreme Court of Justice, the Prosecutor Barbosa will be able to continue leading the process that, in any case, he does not carry out and that was assigned to the head of the Directorate delegated to the Supreme Court Gabriel Ramón Jaimes.
The latter had already responded to a request from Cepeda in which he asked to withdraw from the case. Prosecutor Jaime responded that the grounds provided by law to separate himself from the investigation were not met.
“Autonomy and impartiality in the process are guaranteed,” considered the prosecutor in the case, adding that the hierarchical position exercised by the Prosecutor
General de la Nación is clearly defined by the Constitution, “so it is
they rule out interference in the course of the process. Similarly, he emphasized that
there is no link or enmity with the victim or the procedural subjects “.
JUSTICE
