This week 40 days of the trial faced by former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez for alleged witness manipulation. The case, which for the first time in more than half a century leads a Colombian ex -president to the bench, recently advanced with a long statement from Uribe himself. On May 5, the former president appeared before the courts of Paloquemao in Bogotá and paid testimony for four days. His statement revolved around three axes. First, his “good faith” as a public servant: “I have tried to have a public life, with human mistakes, but honorable.” Then, the review of the timeline of the facts, since it argued that if he had wanted to manipulate witnesses, he would have done so in 2012, when he was denounced by links with paramilitarism, and not in 2018, when the events of the case occurred. And finally, his defense of the coexistence, private surveillance associations arising in the 1990s. Although the judicial process does not directly address its alleged links with paramilitarism, that issue has been a persistent shadow in its political career.
During those days, Uribe also defended his democratic security policy and his efforts to demobilize paramilitary groups during his government. He acknowledged having had contact with some key witnesses, but denied having sought to alter his versions in his favor. He argued that the evidence against him were not conclusive and that the actions of his defense, including that of his lawyer Diego Cadena, responded to legal strategies within the law.
The trial against the ex -president was opened in 2012 when Uribe denounced Senator Iván Cepeda, close to Petrism, for allegedly manipulating testimonies that linked him to paramilitarism. However, in 2018, the Supreme Court concluded that there was no evidence against Cepeda and, on the contrary, he found indications that Uribe would have tried to influence witnesses to discredit the senator. Since then, the process has advanced with the collection of testimonies and evidence that seeks to clarify if Uribe instigated others, such as his lawyer Diego Cadena, to manipulate statements in his favor.
Throughout the judicial process, Uribe has defended that his intention was to verify the information and present it to justice without alterations. However, the Prosecutor’s Office argues that there are evidence, such as telephone interceptions, who suggest a possible influence of the former president on the testimonies of exparamilitaries. The judge, Sandra Heredia, has expressed concern about the duration of the process, which must conclude before October 8, 2025, when they prescribe the crimes imputed.
Chain visits and the first key testimonies
One of the most high moments of the trial has been the intervention of Diego Cadena, his ex -book, who is being investigated in the same case for alleged manipulation of witnesses. The Prosecutor’s Office argues that Cadena visited in prisons several times to exparamilitaries with the purpose of persuading them to modify their testimonies and favor Uribe. Among them, Juan Guillermo Monsalve, imprisoned in La Picota, who has assured that Cadena offered him legal benefits in exchange for retracting his statements about the alleged creation of the Metro block, a paramilitary front, in the Guacharacas farm, owned by the Uribe family. The defense has questioned Monsalve’s credibility, highlighting that he has a history of kidnapping and extortion, but his testimony has been ratified several times before judicial authorities.
Another key witness is Carlos Enrique Vélez, aka Victoralso exparamilitar, who declared to have received several money turns – which exceed 40 million pesos – by chain. According to Vélez, the lawyer handed him an already written testimony to sign it, in which Senator Iván Cepeda of witness manipulation was indicated. The Prosecutor’s Office considers that these chain actions are part of a coordinated strategy to modify the judicial truth. Meanwhile, the defense said that it was “humanitarian aids” granted without the knowledge of Uribe.
On May 12 and 13, Juan Felipe Amaya, former official of the Uribe Government, and José Manuel Rodríguez, lawyer linked to the case. Both defended the former president and denied any intention of manipulation. Rodríguez, in particular, said that visits to the Itagüí prison did not seek to influence witnesses, but to verify information. One of the testimonies that disturbed the most was that of Congressman Hernán Cadavid, of the Democratic Center, who confirmed that Cadena turned money to Carlos Enrique Vélez. Cadavid said that this payment was justified as “humanitarian aid” for the disease of the son of the former partner and that he informed the former president of this fact. In that conversation, he said, Uribe expressed his disapproval: “If you inform me that I was going to advance such an action, I did not authorize it, Doctor Diego,” said Cadavid, remembering the conversation, before the judge.
The trial, which has not yet passed to its intermediate stage, for the test analysis, remains focused on the collection of testimonies. Uribe’s defense has presented a list of more than 70 people, including former officials, political and family allies. The intervention of Andrés Felipe Arias, former Minister of Agriculture, convicted of corruption in the case of agriculture safe entry; and the former president, Mario Uribe, former senator convicted of Parapolitics, who has been mentioned several times in the hearings for his alleged knowledge of chain efforts.
Given the extension of the trial, Judge Sandra Liliana Heredia has expressed her disagreement. “Christmas is going to give us here pointing dates,” he ironized during one of the last audiences. His concern revolves around the possible proceeding of the process, given the volume of testimonies that still remain to be heard. Another of the voices that are there to be testimony in favor of the former president is that of former Néstor Humberto Martínez, whose statement, still without a defined date, is anticipated as crucial to establish whether or not there was an institutional knowledge prior to the efforts of the lawyer Diego Cadena.
For more updates, visit our homepage: NewsTimesWire
