Ernesto Samper says he is a victim of the FARC’s silence for the murder of Álvaro Gómez – Political Parties – Politics

With a reflection on the value of the truth to overcome the armed conflict and criticism of the position of Álvaro Gómez Hurtado’s family, former President Ernesto Samper referred to the recognition of responsibility made by the FARC for the murder of the conservative politician, which occurred in November 1995.(In context: It was a mistake to assassinate a politician of the stature of Álvaro Gómez: Farc).

In dialogue with EL TIEMPO, Samper, who for years has been pointed out by the family of Gómez Hurtado as responsible for his death, affirmed that while the FARC does not prove that they were responsible for the assassination, they will insist on “respecting” all the hypotheses that exist. in this regard and that the authorities are investigating.

“As long as I do not know the circumstances of the way, time and place in which they say they murdered these people, at least in the case of Álvaro Gómez, which is the one that I have the clearest of, of course we are going to continue defending our hypothesis and we will continue to respect the others ”, said the former president.

How did you receive this announcement from the Farc recognizing its responsibility in the crime of Álvaro Gómez Hurtado?

Well with Horacio Serpa we were the first surprised. At no time, during the time I was president (1994-1998) and the unfortunate episode of Álvaro Gómez happened, did we have information of any kind that the FARC could be involved in this episode.

Is it to say that there was never information or rumors about it?

Nothing. This also leads us to a second feeling, and that is that we feel victims of the FARC’s silence and that in all this time we have not had the opportunity to know the facts for which they are incriminating themselves. Based on this, the attitude that we have maintained in these years has been to build an official version of what happened in the events of November 1995.

(We suggest: ‘Infamous hypothesis’: son of Álvaro Gómez on the declaration of Piedad).

Why do you think the FARC took 25 years to acknowledge their responsibility in this crime?

I would distinguish between what it is to recognize and claim. The FARC could have politically vindicated the murder from the moment they committed it. I have no evidence to know why they did not. The recognition is different. That is the importance of transitional justice, because it is not a political claim, but rather they are people who were in the secretariat and come to the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) to say ‘I acknowledge that I committed these crimes’.

Do you think that this hypothesis of the responsibility of the Farc clarifies the crime of Álvaro Gómez?

We celebrate and support that they have resorted to the peace jurisdiction to contribute with their truth, but while I do not know the circumstances of the way, time and place in which they say they murdered these people, at least in the case of Álvaro Gómez, who is the one that I have the clearest of, of course we will continue to defend our hypothesis and we will continue to respect the others.

(We recommend: The chilling confession of the Farc: kill, finish off and counterattack).

What do you think that the family of Álvaro Gómez does not believe, for the moment, in the hypothesis of the responsibility of the FARC in this crime?

I am concerned about the position of the family because it is already a political position. What they are questioning is the transitional justice system. People know that they are on the other side: against the policy of peace. Unfortunately, in this country everything is ending in the polarization around peace and war. We have not been able to get out of the last presidential elections, while the Government has no interest in doing so either. The attitude that the President has adopted these days is frankly worrying. The President is politicizing justice.

And, according to you, what would be the interest of Álvaro Gómez’s family in this case?

Their attitude, against what Dr. Gómez would surely have advised, is a dangerous attitude, one of politicizing the decisions and the judges. I am concerned that what they are doing is not defending the memory of Álvaro Gómez, but trying to create a political debate around his memory. And we must add the economic issue: what they want is to determine that there was a State crime that allows them to pay compensation and claim a ‘ticket’ that all Colombians are going to pay. This takes away a lot of credibility from the hypothesis of Álvaro Gómez’s family.

(Do not be left without reading: ‘To adjudicate those crimes does not stop generating doubts’: Duque).

But the responsibility that the FARC admitted would also take weight off their thesis,
in other words, that of a conspiracy against Álvaro Gómez …

It is true, and if after knowing the facts presented by the FARC I came to realize that my hypothesis does not correspond to reality, I would apologize to all the people who in some way appeared involved in it and, of course, I would acknowledge the truth, which is what we have all pursued for 25 years. I would recognize it and I hope the other spokespeople for the slopes will do the same.

Mauricio Gómez, Álvaro Gómez’s son, says that Piedad Córdoba is trying to free those guilty of the act, among whom, for that family, you are, what do you think about this?

This is part of the manipulation, the false slander, the accommodation of lies to produce impacts. I do not know the journalist Mauricio Gómez, whom I knew and with whom I was a close friend in my already distant youth. It is not even the shadow of what it was. You have incurred objectivity problems. I respect his pain, but he had ethical duties as a journalist which, of course, he is betraying. It seems to me that people have been unfair to Piedad Córdoba.

Why?

Because Piedad is playing a good role. All the people surround her, praise her, say that she is a fighter, that she is a person who plays it. When she frees hostages and intervenes in episodes that were practically ending the peace, she is a hero, but suddenly, if people do not agree with what she is doing, they say that she is the devil, a perverse, manipulative person. In this case, what she did was bring an alert, a piece of news, of which she had become aware.

(Also: Gómez Hurtado’s family does not believe in recognition of the Farc).

Many people wonder why she, like the Farc, kept silence for 25 years …

It is not true that he knew before. This issue of the possible authorship of the Farc in this event has been around for a very short time, at least in internal circles. That there are six people, whose unfortunate homicides, in hitherto unknown conditions and with respect to which it is possible to really know what could have happened to them, it seems to me that it is a debt that we owe to the families of these people.

What political impact do you think this acknowledgment of responsibility made by the Farc on the crime of Álvaro Gómez has?

This has to be seen in context. I do not know what force has come over the transitional justice system, but I have seen for a few months that there is greater will, on the part of all the armed actors, to tell the truth. We lost the fear of the truth, I would say that is what we are registering. If you see that there are 3,000 officers of the Armed Forces of Colombia acknowledging their participation in the ‘false positives’, but also, pressured by opinion, the people of the Farc began to call kidnappings kidnappings and deliver information on the conditions under which they had occurred, he realizes that this truth, understood in this way, is healing. The problem is not whether you believe or not. One does not believe, but accepts the truth. The moment they arrive, tell the truth and we accept that it is the truth, the country will experience a very important stage of internal pacification.(See also: The history of the murders that the Farc is recognizing).

JUAN FRANCISCO VALBUENA
POLITICAL WRITING
Twitter: @juanfvalbuena