Corte Constitucional endurece paso de trabajadores de fondos privados a Colpensiones

0:00 At the WU, Colonel' s report. First of all, congratulate Mr de News de Univisión on the absolute hit of having interviewed President Byden. Our colleague and friend Enrique acevedo the interview has had an impact not only on all the media segments of the audience, but also on the main Anglo media, that is, on their own competition, starting with CNN, which has opened several of its news segments with President Bayden' s statements in an interview that is an absolute first. Daniel, congratulations and, please, today' s report. Thank you very much, July on good morning. This is today ' s Colonel report. This is very serious news for millions of Colombian workers and future suspensions. The Constitutional Court, with the participation of three judges, decided yesterday to substantially tighten the conditions for workers in a private fund to move to pensions. The decision of the Constitutional Court, which will be public in the coming days, contradicts a Supreme Court decision that recognized the right of workers to migrate from the private simple savings regime to the average premium system of colpensions.

1:33 Let me explain as simply as possible the difference between the two pension schemes. Private funds pay a pension based on workers' savings. In the vast majority of cases, this saving ends up becoming a monthly allowance of two minimum wages regardless of the income that the person avenged during his or her working life and over time is reduced to a sad wage thousand In contrast, workers affiliated with colpensions receive an allowance that averages the wages earned during the last ten years before retirement. At the moment they can only be changed from a regime that is worth, that is, from private funds to colpensions, because the opposite route is quite exotic unlikely women before they turn forty- seven years old and men before they turn fifty- two, that is, ten years before they reach retirement age. The Labour Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice had decided on a guardianship of a worker who requested that her change to a private fund be annulled because she had not had enough information at the time of the decision and had therefore gone to a private fund that paid her only sixty- nine per cent of the income she had at the end of her working life, against the ninety per cent she would receive if she were in the average premium scheme, i e in corpeciones. The Supreme Court found that the retired woman

3:10 had not had enough information or even had received misleading information to leave the old regime and move to the private, thereby affecting her pension. As a result, she opened the door for the transfer to be cancelled and that tutor and how she millions of workers could return to the average premium system, which substantially improves her income. The determination came to the Constitutional Court for review. The discussion ended yesterday with the conclusion that the return to competition will harden for potential retirees, that is, that fewer people who have changed to the private regime will be able to return to the average premium, despite having received insufficient or misleading information to make the change. The trends remained six- three against transit to the medium premium regime. Three judges were in favour of fully ratifying the decision of the Supreme Court of Justice and the right to transfer retirees and workers.

4:20 They were Judge José Fernando Reyes President of the Constitutional Court, Judge Vladimir Fernández Andrade and Judge Juan Carlos Cortés González are against the decision of the Supreme Court and, consequently, are in favour of tightening the conditions so that retirees can return to the system of average premium more favourable to their income. Judges Cristina Pardo, Jorge Enrique Ibáñez and Paola Meneses have the majority with the vote of three judges who replaced the handicapped judges, Antonio José Lizarazo Diana Fajar of Natalia Angel. The judges who will make the decision are Jaime Humberto Tobar, constitutionalist and expert in financial law, Antonio Barreto Rosso, also constitutionalist, professor at the University of the Andes and former Minister of Finance, Juan Camilo Restrepo.

5:18 This is perhaps the first time that the Constitutional Court ends up being more conservative than the Supreme Court of Justice. In reviewing a decision, the Constitutional usually assumed more liberal, more pro- worker positions, so to speak, than the Supreme, but gradually the Constitutional Court has moved to the right. The Constitutional Court' s decision is also beginning to mark a trend towards the eventual study of a pension reform in the hypothetical case of its approval by the Senate' s seventh commission. The same as last week' s health reform sank. We have a bonus track. For years, it had been hoped that the Office of the Prosecutor would correctly assess the evidentiary elements that existed in the trial of former President Alvaro Uribe and call him a trial, as the Supreme Court of Justice had done at the time. After years of delaying maneuvers in the prosecution of Francisco Barbosa and Gabriel Ramón Jaime, his coordinator of prosecutors before the Court, yesterday the first prosecutor delegated to the Supreme Court of Justice, Gilberto Villarrealpava, decided to accuse him in a very brief thirteen- page brief. Although the brief points out that the President acted with the so- called Boganster to bribe witnesses and deceive justice, he uses the verbs, cordinated, directed and agreed to bribe witnesses and deceive justice. There are issues in

6:55 the indictment that either remained on the outside or are very weakly sustained. These issues relate, inter alia, to the possible bribery of three witnesses imprisoned in Convita prison, known as the Sinaik, David and Poli alias, and to management offers to change places of detention for convicted prosecutor Hilda Niño Farfán. Those who know the file in detail point out that the indictment recognizes some issues but ignores others Olympically. In general, it is a loose writing and may end up favoring the former president to the bar Uribe, prosecutor Gilberto Villarreal, Paava, who signs it. He became a prosecutor delegated to the Supreme Court of Justice by decision of Gabriel Ramón Jaimes, with whom he shares regional origin and alma mater that, by the way, is the same as the sadly remembered former prosecutor Alejandro Ordóñez. The brief must be substantially improved before the trial preparatory hearing, or because of its gaps, the former President will end up in two at the Urib bar. This was today' s colonel report. Thank you very much.