Congressman Iván Cepeda, his lawyer Reinaldo Villalba and former prosecutor Eduardo Montealegre held a press conference in which they announced that they will file a criminal complaint against prosecutor Gabriel Jaimes for the crime of prevarication by action and omission.
Through a virtual press conference, scheduled even since the night of last Thursday, March 4, Senator Iván Cepeda, his lawyer Reinaldo Villalba and former prosecutor Eduardo Montealegre reacted to the decision announced by the Prosecutor’s Office very early to request preclusion. of the investigation against former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez. In the middle of their statements, they announced that they will file a complaint against the prosecutor in charge of the case, Gabriel Jaimes, for the alleged commission of the crime of prevaricate by action and omission. (Also read: The Country of Spain asks Álvaro Uribe to answer for false positives)
“The first intervention was that of the Polo senator, Iván Cepeda, who serves as a victim in the process against the former president for alleged bribery and procedural fraud. To begin with, Cepeda addressed the ex-president Uribe: “his sad story, at the end of his public life he has tried to twist and tarnish justice by all means, but that has been useless, the youth of this country know his true face, for you there will be no light at the end of the tunnel, “said the congressman who later announced that, in the company of Montealgre, he will denounce the prosecutor in the case for alleged malfeasance.
“Some of the behaviors contrary to the legal system of the prosecutor Jaimes are the following. First, to favor the interests of the accused to the point that, departing from his legal and constitutional duty, he has de facto acted as protector, defender and practically lawyer for Álvaro Uribe Vélez. The positions of the Prosecutor’s Office are a mirror of the arguments of the accused and his defense, ”Cepeda indicated, secondly pointing out that Jaimes has tried to invalidate the actions of the Supreme Court of Justice by repeating the taking of evidence but, this time, benefiting the accused.
For Cepeda, the decision to request the preclusion of the case amounts to a “cynical” ignorance of reality because, in his consideration, there are many elements that show the responsibility of the former president. An example he gave is that for the same events involving Uribe, former congressman Álvaro Hernán Prada and lawyer Diego Cadena are, the first, on the verge of a trial and, the second, already on trial. “While these alleged accomplices are about to answer to justice, they seek to reward the main author with estoppel,” he said. (It may interest you: Álvaro Uribe: they declare inadmissible guardianship that he sought to return his process to zero)
In addition, he pointed out that during the last decade Álvaro Uribe has brought to justice at least 24 false statements against him, the last being Francisco Taborda, a man who has been convicted in another trial for false testimony. According to Cepeda, it is an industrial fabrication of false testimonies that is part of the defense strategy of the former president and that has become a “modus operandi”. In that sense, he said that “several letters were made by people outside who imposed their mark in letters addressed to the Supreme Court, the intervention of third parties and, particularly lawyers who do not formally represent Uribe, have been used to search for these false witnesses ”.
“In these months we have had to attend a show in which Uribe, during these months, making use of his power, has used all kinds of illegal means to exert his vengeful hatred against the magistrates of the Supreme Court of Justice (.. .) In the morning we witnessed the most shameful spectacle that has ever been presented in the history of the prosecution, today led by Francisco Barbosa, the surrender of the criminal investigation before a broken and unscrupulous power. Our dignity and moral strength as victims is superior to this infamy. With the temperance of our convictions we will defeat lies and injustice ”, concluded the senator.
In turn, Cepeda’s lawyer, Reinaldo Villalba, indicated that what the Prosecutor’s Office resolved was an “absolutely announced decision,” since from the beginning it was noted that both the attorney general, Francisco Barbosa, and the prosecutor in the case, Gabriel Jaimes, “lacked what was essential to administer justice: impartiality and independence.” Villalba recalled that as a representative of the victims, he filed a challenge against the two prosecutors, which was later rejected.
“The decision to request estoppel I have to qualify as reckless. The path of impunity continues its course, but it can be stopped, as we hope, by the judges of the Republic. (…) On the condition that it was the accusation brief, we presented the reasons why we considered that the estoppel was appropriate (…) but after eight years of work by the Court, to say that there is no a true propability or that he is not the author, nor does he participate in the conduct, to venture recklessly to request estoppel ”, concluded the lawyer. (You may be interested: The millions that Diego Cadena, Álvaro Uribe’s former lawyer, would have given to witnesses)
The last to intervene was the former prosecutor Eduardo Montealegre who has not yet been recognized as a victim in the process of the former president, supported what was said by Iván Cepeda and confirmed that he will file a complaint against the prosecutor Jaimes for prevarication because, in his opinion, the request for The preclusion “openly and flagrantly” ignored more than 30 pieces of evidence, including testimonies, documentary evidence and interceptions, which are in the file against Uribe. The former official indicated that, on the contrary, Jaimes dedicated himself to collecting evidence that only favored the former president.
“There was a clear political bias, a deviation of power in the collection of this evidence. He served and fulfilled, not the role of the prosecutor who investigates processes and who protects the truth, but he became de facto one more lawyer in Álvaro Uribe’s defense. In addition, he tried to ignore the validity of all the evidence carried out by the Supreme Court of Justice. He resorted to the modus operandi that Álvaro Uribe has used in his defenses for more than 20 years, the acquisition and use of false witnesses to carry out the process, ”said Montealegre.
– .
