The four facts that the Prosecutor’s Office and CNE have already proven and that Petro would have to explain for violating campaign spending limits 2022-2026

Some sectors of Congress took it for granted that, as has been happening with several investigations and complaints against President Gustavo Petro, the case of the violation of his 2022-2026 campaign spending limits would also end up buried in the House of Representatives’ Investigation and Accusation Committee.

Of the investigating triumvirate for that matter, two are affiliated with parties close to the president: Alirio Uribe, from Pacto Histórico, and Gloria Arizabaleta, from La Fuerza de La Paz, the movement of Roy Barreras, former ambassador of the Petro government and who has just announced his vote for Iván Cepeda for the second presidential round.

The only representative investigating the case, politically independent, is Wílmer Ramón Carrillo, from the ‘U’ party.

Alirio Uribe, who is attending meetings to boost Iván Cepeda’s campaign – after the defeat in the first presidential round against Abelardo de La Espriella – had already filed a motion requesting that the case be dismissed for atypical conduct.

In other words, as coordinator of the investigating committee, he stated that, in his opinion, President Petro’s conduct within his campaign did not constitute any crime.

However, in the middle of the week, a dissenting vote was announced, signed by Arizabaleta and Carrillo, which, after three years of collecting evidence and testimonies, automatically revived the process with the political and criminal repercussions this entails.

Indeed, in a turn that some in Casa de Nariño did not anticipate, both agreed that there are still key issues that need to be investigated and that, among other evidence and proofs, it is necessary to summon the candidate-president for questioning, which in criminal justice is equivalent to being formally linked to a case file.

“One of the investigators had already suggested that the president be heard in a free statement. But that evidence was never decreed, and now it is most likely that the case will remain in the hands of the representatives who arrive on July 20 to the Investigation and Accusation Committee,” a source from the so-called Lower House said.

He added that the investigating triumvirate dedicated itself to resolving the 26 recusations filed against Alirio Uribe – which never prospered – and never delved into the evidence transferred by the National Electoral Council (CNE) when it sanctioned the Petro campaign for violating spending limits by an amount exceeding 5.3 billion pesos.

In fact, EL TIEMPO investigated and established that several of the points that Arizabaleta and Carrillo are asking to delve into are the same ones that had already been pointed out in the files being processed for the same matter both in the CNE and in the Prosecutor’s Office.

In addition to the payment of witnesses, which was never declared in the books, there are contributions from the USO union and Fecode. There is even an additional issue, that of flight hour expenses, which the Supreme Court of Justice is also reviewing.

What’s more, part of that evidentiary material was sufficient for the CNE to sanction Ricardo Roa, manager of the Petro Presidente Campaign; and for the Prosecutor’s Office to charge him on May 11.

Arizabaleta and Carrillo began by warning in their dissenting vote that while the campaign management was in charge of professionals specialized in electoral logistics and finance, the candidate also assumed responsibilities in his position as guarantor.

And, in their opinion, the contribution of 500 million pesos from the Colombian Federation of Education Workers (Fecode) should be investigated.

“The tracing of this payment instrument reveals a chain of intermediations designed to visually distance the resources from the prohibited source and disguise their real link with the presidential campaign,” reads the section related to that contribution.

And it concludes that if it had been a legitimate collaboration, it would have been enough to declare it and identify the contributor. However, a possible deliberate intention to evade state control is noted.

The other two points are the contribution from the Unión Sindical Obrera (USO), for 600 million pesos; and the air transport expenses paid to the company Sadi SAS., for more than 1.249 billion pesos in the first round and 962 million pesos in the second round.

But perhaps the most relevant fact is the payment of the so-called electoral witnesses that President Petro has come out to defend.

“The magnitude of the irregularities detected, which exceed 3 billion pesos and involve sophisticated financial triangulation mechanisms, should have been perceptible to any person who diligently exercised the duty of vigilance over the campaign’s finances,” reads another part of the document.

That amount is more similar to what the Prosecutor’s Office indicated in the case against Roa, than to that of the CNE, which did not take into account the air transport expenses paid to Sadi SAS., a company linked to the so-called narco-pilot Carlos Eduardo Restrepo, ‘Caco’.

The latter, as EL TIEMPO revealed, surrendered to US justice for drug trafficking crimes and is now back in Colombia after a quick collaboration agreement with justice.

To clarify all these chapters, in addition to hearing Petro, the investigating representatives request that Magistrate Benjamín Ortiz, the case investigator at the CNE, be summoned to testify. Also, the legal representative of the company linked to the payment of electoral witnesses and even the courier companies through which these payments were made.

Chamber officials told EL TIEMPO that it is now expected that, for the week of June 16, the House Investigation and Accusation Committee will schedule on the agenda both the dismissal motion signed by Alirio Uribe, and the dissenting vote of Gloria Arizabaleta and Wílmer Carrillo, and choose which path to follow.

The date is key because the matter would be resolved just days before the second presidential round, with a president actively campaigning for candidate Iván Cepeda.

Should they decide to proceed with the process, a formal investigation would be opened immediately.

“And the next step is to present an accusation project that would also be submitted for study and vote by all members of the Investigation and Accusation Committee. But, due to timing, that step would fall to the new members,” a member of that congressional body explained to EL TIEMPO.

If Alirio Uribe’s motion is accepted, the case would be closed immediately.

And while the interpretation in some sectors of the Chamber is that the surprising decision of the investigating representatives is due to political calculations, the Attorney General’s Office is investigating what is happening with a series of processes that are not advancing in that commission.

“With less than two months left until the Petro government ends, they have nothing to gain or lose,” explained a legislator. And he recalled that, in May, the Special Chamber of First Instance of the Supreme Court condemned Wílmer Carrillo, from ‘la U’, in the first instance for the crime of contract without compliance with legal requirements, signed when he was secretary of infrastructure of the department of Norte de Santander.

And regarding Gloria Arizabaleta, he pointed out that the head of her party, Roy Barreras (her ex-husband) has made several criticisms of Iván Cepeda’s campaign because he has not been admitted.

In parallel, the Instruction Chamber of the Attorney General’s Office announced that it has just initiated an investigation stage against the congressmen who make up the House Investigation and Accusation Committee for alleged unjustified delay in the processing of cases against President Petro. Specifically, Alirio Uribe, Gloria Arizabaleta, and Wílmer Carrillo are mentioned.

But also the processing that other members of that body have been giving to other processes against privileged individuals, including magistrates of high courts, is being reviewed.

In the official document, known by EL TIEMPO, there is talk of “lack of diligence, organization, and possible prevarication by omission” by investigating representatives.

In this regard, the control entity carried out a proceeding on June 3, in which it established that there are currently around 3,000 actions, of which 290 include the name of President Petro for different conducts, several of them for participation in politics.

(Consult all articles from EL TIEMPO’s Investigative Unit here)

Petro has not yet commented on his possible summons for questioning. But for some officials of his government, the decision of the Attorney General’s Office will weigh when the Commission defines whether or not to continue with the process against the outgoing president.

INVESTIGATIVE UNIT

u.investigativa@eltiempo.com

@UinvestigativaET

Follow us now on Facebook