Victims demand that Álvaro Uribe be brought to trial | News


Colombian senator Iván Cepeda confirmed this Thursday that the decision of a judge to deny the request for preclusion in the so-called Uribe Case, is in some way a triumph in the investigation carried out by the justice for alleged procedural fraud and bribery, before which the Victims demand that he be brought to trial.


Colombian Justice rules that former President Uribe must go to trial

According to Cepeda, “the first thing is to point out the importance of this decision, which is unprecedented in Colombia. For the first time, a head of state is going to have to appear before a judge to assume criminal responsibility for very serious events.”

Assessing Wednesday’s decision, Cepeda said “This process has been a democratic lesson in the country. It once again reminds us that the judiciary must have control, regardless of the figures investigated. I want to make it clear that the judiciary, probity , that there are no pressures, no kind of actions that stop the independence of the judges of the Republic. Highlight that decision of the judge 28, Carmen Helena, exhaustive and meticulous decision “.

In a decision made on Wednesday by a Bogota judge, the petition presented by the Attorney General’s Office was rejected to preclude the process that was carried out against former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez for alleged pressure on witnesses. In her extensive intervention, the judicial official questioned several of the arguments presented by the prosecutor Gabriel Jaimes Durán, asking that the case be filed due to the atypical behavior of the former president.

Cepeda also said that it is demonstrated that the only thing that proceeds is “the call to trial.” The senator also pointed out that, he says, “the Prosecutor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office and Uribe’s defense behaved in a coordinated manner, like a group. This is a triumph despite immense difficulties.”

Former deputy prosecutor Jorge Perdomo, who accompanied Cepeda this Thursday, said that the judge, with her decision “responded to the arguments put forward by us. She agreed with us” and added: “The judge considers that it is impossible to distort the presumption of innocence, he considered that he should go to trial and that estoppel is not appropriate. Another key element is that specifically those of us who participated as victims, were recognized. We said that there were maneuvers by the defendant to tarnish the name of people who administer justice at some point ”.

Comments are closed.