The reasons of the Supreme Court to stay with the process against Uribe for ñeñepolítica – Cortes – Justicia

Unlike what has happened with the other investigations that the Supreme Court of Justice carried out against former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez, which were sent to the Attorney General’s Office, this Monday the Investigation Chamber decided that it will continue to carry out the process against Uribe for the so-called ‘Ñeñepolítica’.

In this ABC, EL TIEMPO explains the most important of this decision that was taken and the arguments that the Court had on the merits to stay with this case, in which Interceptions on the phone of the deceased rancher José Guillermo ‘el Ñeñe’ Hernández are being investigated, and that they speak of an alleged illicit entry of money for the campaign of then president Iván Duque, calls in which Uribe is mentioned. (Read: Supreme Court opens investigation to Álvaro Uribe for audios of ‘Ñeñe’).

Why did the Court stay with this process and not with the other cases against Uribe?

While other processes that the Supreme Court of Justice had against Álvaro Uribe —such as the alleged bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud; that of alleged pressure on witnesses to speak against Iván Cepeda; three cases of libel and slander; and that of the investigation into the massacre of El Aro, La Granja and the murder of Jesús María Valle— were sent by the Investigation Chamber to the Attorney General’s Office, the same did not happen with that of the ‘Ñeñepolítica’.

The reason is that, after Uribe resigned from the Senate on August 18, he lost his jurisdiction as a congressman, a guarantee that allowed the investigations against him to be carried out by the highest criminal court, the Supreme Court of Justice. and not an ordinary court.

The only way in which that jurisdiction could be extended – so that the Court could continue to prosecute Uribe – was if those facts under investigation were related to his activity as a congressman or to his political leadership.

And in this case of the so-called ‘Ñeñepolítica’, the Court found that in this process, unlike the others that it has already sent to the Prosecutor’s Office, the facts show in a preliminary way that there may have been a relationship between the alleged crimes and the Uribe’s activity as a senator in the face of an alleged abuse of power.

What is the investigation against Uribe for the ‘Ñeñepolítica’?

This is an investigation that is being carried out in the preliminary stage in the Investigation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, that is, evidence and evidences are still being sought to determine if a formal process is opened or if the case is archived. In this file, Uribe is investigated for alleged electoral crimes.

At this stage, the Court has not established that the events for which Uribe was denounced could have occurred and so far only a series of evidence has been collected to maintain the preliminary investigation.

This investigation was initiated by a complaint filed on March 5, before the high court, by journalists Gonzálo Guillén and Daniel Mendoza. The complaint was filed for the crimes of corruption of the voter and the financing of electoral campaigns with prohibited sources.

According to the complaint, in the last presidential elections in which Iván Duque was the winner, there was a vote-buying operation on the North coast of the country supposedly in favor of Duque. That vote buying, according to the complainants, took place with the orders of Senator Álvaro Uribe Vélez, events in which ‘Ñeñe’ Hernández was allegedly involved.

What do the audios intercepted from ‘Ñeñe’ Hernández have to do with this process?

The preliminary investigation against Uribe in the case of the ‘Ñeñepolítica’ includes interceptions on the telephone of ‘Ñeñe’ Hernández in which he is heard speaking with María Claudia Daza, who was part of the Legislative Work Unit (UTL) of Uribe.

In those lawful interceptions, obtained in some wiretaps in which Hernández’s phone was tapped by a homicide investigation, he and Daza talk about alleged money that entered Duque’s campaign under the table. And Daza mentions Uribe and assures that “he has him aligned” and that he tells him everything. (Also read: The 20 minutes of the ‘Ñeñe’ Hernández audios).

Why in this case did the Court conclude that the facts could have a relationship with Uribe’s role as senator?

To reach that conclusion and refuse to pass the case on to the Prosecutor’s Office, the Court evaluated the alleged involvement of members of Uribe’s UTL in the alleged crimes.

Faced with this situation, says the jurisprudence, if the members of a UTL are used for these purposes, it could be found that the functions of congressman were constituted in the means and the opportunity to execute an alleged crime. It is in this sense that there would be a relationship between the facts under investigation and the functions as a congressman.

And is that the UTL, recalls the Court, are teams made up of various public servants who help congressmen fulfill their functions. These employees are subordinate to the congressman, who has a command power over them.

Therefore, if a congressman uses the power he has over his UTL members to commit an alleged crime, even if he resigns from Congress, his jurisdiction could be extended so that the Supreme Court of Justice continues to investigate those facts.

Thus, one can speak of an abuse of power over subordinates, and therefore of the position, when the participation of the members of the UTL in an event is not minor or accidental, but rather implies that they are very involved, even up to the point of engaging your own responsibility in the case.

What was the role of María Claudia Daza, who was a member of the UTL de Uribe, in this case?

For the Court, the decisive element to stay with this process against Uribe are the doubts that persist as to whether these events occurred and, in that case, the alleged role that María Claudia Daza, who was Uribe’s assistant and part of your UTL.

(Also: Court will continue to prosecute Uribe for ‘Ñeñepolítica’).

Until now, the preliminary investigations carried out by the Court expose several conversations by ‘Ñeñe’ Hernández that could evidence an alleged vote-buying operation in which María Claudia Daza, as a member of Uribe’s UTL, was an interlocutor. These conversations and interceptions, for the high court, would seem to indicate that Daza was participating in the electoral campaign for Iván Duque to be president and that he was taking steps sent by his boss Álvaro Uribe.

This is how the Court considers that until now it has not been found that Uribe had ordered this alleged vote-buying operation, since it is just an investigative hypothesis that is being worked on. But if that had existed, in that case Daza could have had an important intervention, so he considers that this element is what enables the high court to continue maintaining competence in this process.

As this has not yet been ruled out – that Uribe allegedly abused his functions to give orders to Daza in the alleged purchase of votes -, for now the high court will continue to have jurisdiction over these events.

Why in the case of alleged bribery of witnesses, if a member of the UTL was also mentioned, the Court did not stay with that process?

The reason is that, according to the Court, not in all cases in which members of a UTL participate in the commission of a crime by a congressman, the jurisdiction can be extended, since there are cases in which the participation of those members in the facts investigated is incidental or occasional.

In the process that the Court was leading against Uribe for alleged bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud, a case in which María Claudia Daza and Fabián Rojas are mentioned –who were part of the UTL of Uribe-, the high court found that although they supposedly did intervened in the collection of testimonies, that fact alone could not lead to the conclusion that there was a nexus between Uribe’s role and the crimes for which he is being investigated, for an abusive or diverted use of his position so that the Court could continue to maintain jurisdiction if.

Why is representative Edward David Rodríguez also investigated in this process by the ‘Ñeñepolítica’?

On March 17, Senator Iván Cepeda filed before the Examining Room a letter in which he attached a journalistic note that talks about a conversation between ‘el Ñeñe’ Hernández and María Claudia Daza, in which they refer to a meeting that Presumably, the representative to the Chamber Edward Rodríguez, of the Democratic Center party, said that they had planned a private meeting between the then candidate Duque and 15 mayors of Magdalena.

JUSTICE DRAFTING
Twitter: @JusticiaET