What is coming in the investigation against Álvaro Uribe? | L & # 39; UNIVERSAL

An active day was held Wednesday at the Supreme Court of Justice, after the high court called Senator Álvaro Uribe Vélez for investigation, which was opened an investigation for alleged manipulation of witnesses, for which he was they can charge charges of procedural fraud and corruption.

These accusations are related to alleged pressure that Juan Guillermo Monsalve would have suffered, a key witness in the case of alleged relations with paramilitaries against Santiago Uribe Vélez, that people close to him the former president Uribe reportedly contacted him allegedly that he would change his version against the brother of the exmandatario and thus arm a case for false witnesses against Iván Cepeda.

On the Indagatory 1 pic.twitter.com/3LEQqr3AyE

– Álvaro Uribe Vélez (@AlvaroUribeVel) July 25, 2018

In this case, the member of the Ál Congress was also called to the Varero Hernán Prada, who they point to have negotiated to put pressure on Monsalve. For this reason, around 9 am, Prada arrived at the Secretariat of the High Court Criminal Cbadation Chamber to inform him of the summons and ask for evidence against him to arm his defense in the company of his defense team. # 39; lawyers. 19659002] The Congressman pointed out that once he has read part of the file against him, he considers that he has sufficient evidence to demonstrate that he is not guilty. he did not participate in any illegal plan to badign an investigation to the court. "It is very likely, as I stated in a statement, that a criminal plan is being drawn up against President Uribe and against me," said the representative in the House.

Prada also studies guardianship after noting that he follows due process and even discusses bringing this issue before international bodies to guarantee his rights.

Similarly, around 11 am, the lawyer Jaime Granados, who represents former president Uribe, also attended the court. submit a formal request for evidence to begin organizing the senator's defense. Although the lawyer refrained from making statements Wednesday, during his first visit to the court, he described as "surprising" the call for questioning.

"We do not see that Alvaro Uribe has anything to do with this issue – to have more details to carry out the proper procedure.The President asked that everything be examined quickly, he never hesitated in court, on the contrary, he is very interested in clarifying all issues as soon as possible and in this case it will not be the exception ", Once Uribe has learned his call to question, he has wrote a message on his twitter account announcing the situation and expressing his intention to resign from his seat in the Senate of the Republic, arguing that he did not want to affect his work in the Legislative to focus on his defense.

However, Uribe's resignation did not reach the Congress of the Republic on Wednesday and although it happens in the rest of the week, it can not be discussed until next Tuesday when the plenary sitting of the Senate is meeting. 19659002] And it is that this resignation would have legal implications, because coming out of Congress he loses his jurisdiction, which is why the Supreme Court of Justice should relocate. entrust the process to the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, a fact which in some areas has been described as a strategy for benefiting from a more favorable judicial process. In response to this hypothesis, Senator Uribe Vélez himself replied

: "I have never escaped the Supreme Court for what they now invent that the Senate's resignation must take away from it the competition "The accusation about witnesses that makes me rest on facts made in the time that I exercise as a senator, who upholds the jurisdiction of the court," said Uribe

I n & # 39; I have never evaded the Supreme Court to invent now that resignation The Senate must remove competition.

The accusation about the witnesses who make me based on facts done in the time that I exercise as a senator, who maintains the jurisdiction of the Court

– Álvaro Uribe Vélez (@ AlvaroUribeVel) July 25, 2018

Jaime Arrubla, former President of the Supreme Court of Justice, found that the senator had the right to waive his jurisdiction to be tried in another court, which does not allow him to be tried. implies no questionable strategy in legal terms

"As long as the resignation does not take effect, if it is not accepted by Congress, the court may advance the investigation proceedings, but by the time it is known that the functions have stopped, Analyze whether it is competent or not to continue the process, "said Arronse.

For his part, Jorge Anibal Gómez, former president of the Supreme Court of Justice, said that the jurisdiction of the case depends on the crimes for which it is intended to prosecute Uribe, who in the case are bribes and frauds, which would mean that they are crimes on their own, that is, that they have nothing to do with his performance as a public servant. subject to the procedure of Law 600 (Code of Criminal Procedure before 2005). If it were transmitted to the Office of the Prosecutor, a different procedure would be applied, that of Law 906, an accusatory procedure in which the Office of the Prosecutor investigates and accuses, and it is a judge who advances the trial, " declared Gómez

.The former judge also explained that there was no stipulated time to forward the case of the Supreme Court to the prosecutor's office.If necessary, the High Court would send the records when it finds that the crimes have nothing to do with its public service.

Gómez also clarified that if there is an investigation in court, this version may to be taken as evidence in the process, as stipulated by Law 600, whereas if requested by the prosecutor's office it would be a testimony or an affidavit, as stated in Law 906.

Similarly, 39, former magistrate clarified that Law 906 The procedure to be followed by the Office of the Prosecutor to bind a person to a judicial proceeding is an impeachment hearing before a safeguards review judge. In case of occurrence, the investigating body is autonomous to decide when to quote the auditions, which are scheduled when it is considered that they have sufficient evidence.

For his part, former Attorney General Francisco Javier Cintura pointed out that in the practice of speech there is no difference between criminal proceedings at the Supreme Court and in court .

"From the point of view of objective, truthful and impartial justice, there is no difference, it is still to be tried by the court or an ordinary judge, obviously when the court judge is due to a jurisdiction, "explained Cintura.