The decision of the National Electoral Council to investigate Gustavo Petro‘s campaign for alleged financial irregularities marks a milestone in Colombian politics, reaffirming its competence to supervise compliance with electoral regulations. Despite accusations of bias and conflicts of jurisdiction, the courts have supported the legitimacy of the entity to carry out the process, guaranteeing transparency in the presidential elections.
DIARIO DEL HUILA, ANALYSIS
The National Electoral Council (CNE) of Colombia has been at the center of political controversy after deciding to open a formal investigation into the presidential campaign of the current president, Gustavo Petro, for alleged irregularities in financing during the 2022 elections. This decision has sparked a debate around the legitimacy of the CNE’s actions, the legal implications for the current administration and transparency in Colombian electoral politics. Through several recent rulings, different courts have supported the authority of the CNE to carry out these investigations, resolving conflicts of jurisdiction with other entities such as the Commission of Investigation and Accusations of the House of Representatives, and reaffirming its essential role in the supervision of the electoral processes in the country.
Key judicial decisions:
1. Inadmissible tutela actions: Several courts, including the Superior Court of Medellín and Bogotá, have declared multiple tutela actions presented by citizens seeking to stop CNE investigations inadmissible. These actions were dismissed on the grounds that the plaintiffs did not have sufficient standing to act in defense of rights that did not belong to them directly. Cases such as those of John Alexander Echeverry and Heráclito Landínez illustrate how the courts have supported the autonomy of the CNE to investigate possible violations in the financing of the presidential campaign of the Historical Pact Coalition, led by Gustavo Petro.
2. Ratification of the Council of State: One of the most notable decisions came from the Council of State, which, through the Consultation and Civil Service Chamber, reaffirmed on August 6, 2024 the competence of the CNE to continue investigations into possible financial irregularities in the 2022 campaign. This ruling clarified that, if irregularities are proven, the power to decide on the loss of the presidential office falls exclusively on Congress, but administrative sanctions related to campaigns are the direct responsibility of the CNE.
You can read: Petro announced that it will send new evidence about the Pegasus case to the Prosecutor’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office
3. Conflicts of jurisdiction resolved: The investigation has generated conflicts of jurisdiction between the CNE and the Investigation Commission of the House of Representatives. In this sense, the Consultation and Civil Service Chamber resolved that the CNE maintains its capacity to act in these cases, while Congress can only intervene in cases that lead to an eventual loss of office, following a decision by the CNE on administrative infractions. This resolution has been key to delimiting the functions of each entity and avoiding jurisdictional overlaps.
Investigation process of the Petro Presidente campaign:
On October 8, 2024, the Plenary Chamber of the CNE approved, with seven votes in favor and two abstentions, to open a formal investigation and file charges against President Gustavo Petro and several key members of his campaign team, including Ricardo Roa. , campaign manager. The charges are based on the alleged exceeding of the financing limits established by the electoral law, as well as the failure to report certain payments and contributions. Among the irregularities pointed out are the alleged payments to electoral witnesses, donations from organizations such as FECODE and the USO, and contributions from private companies such as the cryptocurrency company Daily Cop.
Judge Álvaro Hernán Prada, who had a prominent role in drafting the report that allowed the opening of the investigation, has been the subject of criticism from sectors related to President Petro. During his time as a representative to the Chamber for the Democratic Center, Prada was known for his critical positions towards the president, which has led Petro and his allies to point out that he should have declared himself unable to participate in this investigation. Despite accusations of bias, Prada has defended the objectivity of the investigation, arguing that the CNE’s decisions are aimed at guaranteeing transparency in the country’s electoral processes.
Statements and reactions
The CNE’s decision to investigate Petro’s campaign has sparked a wave of reactions both in the political sphere and in civil society. President Petro, through his account on the social network his government. This statement ignited the debate, and opposition figures, such as the Bogotá councilor of the Democratic Center party, Daniel Briceño, responded that the CNE’s actions are legitimate and aim to guarantee the legality of the electoral processes, beyond any agenda. policy.
Internal divergences in the CNE
Within the CNE itself, the vote was not free of discrepancies. Judge Altus Baquero, who voted in favor of the indictment, expressed important reservations in a later document. Baquero pointed out that, in his opinion, including the president in the investigation could be ignoring the special jurisdiction granted to him by the Constitution. In addition, he suggested that the irregularities would have been concentrated in the first electoral round, not the second, and that the amount of money involved was less than initially reported. According to Baquero, the lack would have been approximately 856 million pesos, and not the more than 3,000 million indicated in the accusation.
Baquero also shared President Petro’s thesis that payments to electoral witnesses cannot be considered campaign expenses, since they do not directly participate in political promotion, but rather fulfill a supervisory function during election day, outside of the official campaign period. Despite his objections, his vote was decisive for the opening of the investigation, and it will be during the process that the observations raised by the magistrate will be delved into.
The role of magistrate Álvaro Hernán Prada
Álvaro Hernán Prada has been a key figure in this process. As one of the authors of the presentation approved by the CNE to investigate Petro’s campaign, he has been at the center of the debate about the transparency and impartiality of the organization. His political history, linked to the Democratic Center, and his involvement in other controversial judicial cases, such as that of the alleged false witnesses involving former President Álvaro Uribe, have generated suspicions among government supporters, who suggest that Prada could have a bias in against Petro. However, Prada has defended his stance, insisting that his role as a magistrate is to ensure that the law is followed regardless of the political implications.
Arguments from judicial decisions
The courts have been consistent in their arguments to support the competence of the CNE:
– Subsidiarity and active standing: The courts have emphasized that the tutela action is a subsidiary resource that should not be used to stop administrative processes if other defense mechanisms are available.
– Maintenance of presidential jurisdiction: Although the president has certain legal protections, judicial decisions have clarified that the CNE can investigate financing aspects without violating the jurisdiction, since it does not imply a criminal sanction that must be processed exclusively by Congress.
– Protection of due process: The resolutions have highlighted that the CNE has followed due process, guaranteeing the right to defense of all those involved.
The reiteration of the CNE’s competence to investigate and sanction irregularities in the financing of presidential campaigns underlines the importance of electoral transparency in Colombia. These judicial decisions strengthen the role of the CNE and ensure that political campaigns remain within established legal limits, reaffirming the country’s commitment to democracy and accountability. The ongoing investigation against President Gustavo Petro’s campaign will be a high-impact case that will test the Colombian electoral system’s ability to handle complex situations without losing sight of the principles of impartiality and justice.
You can read: Iván Mordisco was photographed sailing in a river in Caquetá