[ad_1]
In the coming months, in the offices of the magistrates of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, some of the most controversial or media court cases of the last two decades will be evaluated again, such as the ‘Yidispolitica ‘,’ parapolitics’, the ‘carousel of contracts’, the assassination of Luis Carlos Galán, the DAS chops, among others.
Those processes in which their convicts seemed to have an end point, will be reopened as a blow to the tutelage of former Minister Andrés Felipe Arias.
Although when deciding the guardianship of Arias, the Constitutional Court only ordered a review of the challenge to his conviction, –which required to present guardianships to other convicted in sole instance, interested in having their rulings reviewed -, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice decided to extend this guarantee to other people in the same condition as the former minister.
(Also read: 137 convicts presented an objection to the Court against their ruling)
Thus, for the sake of equality, the Criminal Chamber allowed that the individuals convicted in a single instance, as well as citizens who were convicted for the first time in a second instance or cassation judgment, could challenge those sentences until last Friday, November 20.
In total, the Court received 137 challenges of which he agreed to study 84. The reason the other 53 were rejected was because they did not meet the requirements. One of them was that the sentence had been issued between January 30, 2014 and January 17, 2018.
The first date is the day from which, according to the Constitutional Court, by order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Colombia was obliged to guarantee the challenge of single instance sentences. The second, when the double instance law for graduates came into force in the country.
(It may interest you: Judge grants work permit to Andrés Felipe Arias)
One of those did not meet that requirement and the challenge was rejected, it was the former governor of Sucre, Álvaro Alfonso García Romero, sentenced to 40 years, on February 23, 2010, for ‘parapolitics’ and the Macayepo massacre.
Those who did not have jurisdiction also had to meet the requirement that their case had not been reviewed in cassation.
(It may be of interest to you: What comes in the case against Uribe after being charged with bribery?)
Of the 84 challenges admitted, according to the Court, 22 are from former senior officials convicted in a single instance. The other 62 are from citizens who, although they did have two instances, were convicted for the first time by the second judge who reviewed their case (a higher court) or in cassation in Court.
Those who contested
Among the gauges to whom the appeal was admitted there are four condemned by the ‘Yidispolitics’, case in which gifts were offered in exchange for Congress allowing the reelection of former President Álvaro Uribe. Thus, the Court will review the challenges of the former ministers Diego Palacio Betancourt and Sabas Pretelt, sentenced to 6 years and 8 months for these events.
It will also review the appeal of former secretary Alberto Velásquez, who received a 5-year sentence for that same scandal, as well as former representative Iván Díaz Mateus.
Former Minister Diego Palacio was one of those who challenged his conviction.
Mauricio Moreno. TIME Archive
(We invite you to read: The new life of former Minister Diego Palacio, now in the Congo)
In the chapter of the ‘chuzadas’, the Court will evaluate the challenges of the former secretary of the presidency, Bernardo Moreno Villegas, and the former director of the DAS, María del Pilar Hurtado, sentenced to 8 and 14 years, respectively.
He also contested the general (r) and former director of DAS Miguel Alfredo Maza Márquez, sentenced to 30 years in prison for the murder of Luis Carlos Galán Sarmiento.
María del Pilar Hurtado filed an appeal against her 14-year sentence.
In the ‘parapolitics’ There is the challenge of the former Congressman of Caquetá, Luis Fernando Almario Rojas, sentenced to 10 years for his ties with the Auc, as well as that of Efrén Antonio Hernández Díaz, former representative of Casanare.
(Also read: Hard response from the Court to the Inter-Parliamentary Union for the Uribe case).
For acts of corruption, the high court will study the resources of former senator Iván Moreno Rojas, sentenced to 14 years in prison for the case of the contract ‘carousel’ in Bogotá; that of former prosecutor Rodrigo Aldana, who received a 9-year sentence for favoring former senator Otto Bula in a process of domain forfeiture; and that of the former governor of Arauca, Julio Acosta Bernal, who pays six and a half years for irregularities in the construction of a tourist park.
Iván Moreno Rojas, former senator convicted of the ‘carousel’ of contracts.
What comes next?
Once the challenge is accepted, lThe Court gives those convicted 15 days to support their appeals. Each case is handed over to a magistrate of the Criminal Chamber who must form a special review chamber together with two other magistrates.
Although in theory, who remains as speaker of the case You have 30 days to file your judgment project (either maintaining the sentence, knocking it down, or decreasing it), surely those times will not be fulfilled.
A magistrate of the Court assured that one of the problems they have had is that several magistrates of the Criminal Chamber -The oldest- have declared themselves disabled in some cases, since they had knowledge of them in the past.
(Read: Court denies review of conviction of former senator Álvaro ‘el Gordo’ García)
This implies that many of these challenges could fall to the newer magistrates of the Criminal Chamber: Hugo Quintero, Fabio Ospitia, Gerson Chaverra and Diego Eugenio Corredor. If they are unable to form a chamber to review the process, they must choose between the 18 co-judges of the Criminal Chamber.
TIME knew that to resolve possible congestion, the Superior Council of the Judiciary has already authorized that each magistrate of this chamber be given another auxiliary magistrate.
Each review of the challenge, explains the magistrate consulted, will be different, since in some the convicted ones state that they do not agree with the amount of the penalty, while in others they want to knock down evidence, or the whole case. What is clear is that new tests may not be performed in any case, nor is there any room for prescriptions, nor for the condemned prisoners to be released.
But the truth is that it is difficult to establish when an answer, this time a definitive one, will be given to the 84 cases that are now reopened and that will surely occupy the attention of public opinion in the coming months or years.
JUSTICE DRAFTING
Twitter: @JusticiaET
[ad_2]
