Prosecutor’s Office insists on protected witness in “Santa Marta Case” – 2024-04-26 04:31:59

Editorial Diario Co Latino

The Sensuntepeque Sentencing Court will hold a special hearing this Friday, April 26, to decide whether or not the protected witness of the key Prosecutor’s Office “Soriano” participates in the eventual trial against the leaders of Santa Marta and ADES.

“Soriano’s” statement is the main evidence presented by the Prosecutor’s Office to accuse the Cabañas environmentalists of an alleged murder. However, the Sensuntepeque Investigative Court left him out of public view because his testimony would be “repetitive” because it was already presented as advance evidence in the initial hearing held in February of last year in the Victoria Peace Court. .

At the preliminary hearing on April 3, Judge María Elizabeth Amaya rejected the Prosecutor’s request to incorporate “Soriano” as a witness for the public hearing because she considered it repetitive. “The purpose of advance evidence is the unrepeatability of a person’s statement in the public hearing…” says the resolution of the investigative hearing, citing article 305 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

“That is to say, by having the witness’s advance statement, it is not necessary for him to testify again about the facts, since in theory the prosecutor’s representation requested the advance of evidence because there was a reason why he would not have the witness in the eventual public hearing,” argues the resolution, held by Diario Co Latino.

Given this decision of the Investigating Judge and the rejection of the appeal presented in the same preliminary hearing, the Prosecutor’s Office asked the Sensuntepeque Sentencing Court to hold a special hearing where it will insist on its request to incorporate “Soriano” as a witness for public hearing. despite the fact that he already gave his testimony at the initial hearing.

This hearing will take place this Friday, April 26. This was confirmed by Diario Co Latino, through a judicial notification to which it had access.

The fears of the defense of environmentalists

Sources linked to the case told this media that the Prosecutor’s Office would be seeking to “correct” the testimony of “Soriano”, who first said that he witnessed the events and then that they told him what happened.

“The Prosecutor’s Office’s insistence on bringing this false witness to public view confirms that he has no evidence and that his accusation depends on him (the witness’s account),” the source said, adding that “surely the prosecutors want to correct the “Soriano’s statements given the contradictions he had in his statement at the initial hearing.”

“Chambre witness”

Jurists and social organizations have pointed out the lack of credibility of the Prosecutor’s witness. One of them is Ovidio Mauricio, director of the renowned human rights organization Tutela Legal “María Julia Hernández”, who has described him as a “chambre witness”.

For Mauricio, the evidence of the falsehood of the witness “Soriano” is that the Prosecutor’s Office and the courts did not find the body of the alleged victim in the place that he indicated to them.

ADES Santa Marta has denounced that the case of the community leaders went to public hearing, despite the lack of evidence. The organization points out that the Prosecutor’s Office does not have the corpus delicti or other significant elements of evidence to compensate for the absence of the body of the alleged victim.”