El apasionante detrás de cámaras de la Sala Plena que eligió a la nueva fiscal general

0:00 At the WU. The Colonel report, today' s Colonel report has everything we want to know about the election of Attorney General of the Nation. What happened in that exciting audience among the best lawyers in the country to determine whether one could or could not choose, who voted, by whom, what moved the balance yesterday definitively and how the crisis of the candidate was handled that, as a bad loser, what she did was try to sabotage the election. This is today' s Colonel report. Daniel Welcome, good morning, Julio.

0:44 This is today' s Colonel report. I would have liked to be there. The legal discussion that took place twenty- four hours ago in the Palace of Justice. They will forgive football fans It was better than the World Cup final twenty- three of Colombia' s best lawyers locked up arguing about whether or not they could choose the new Attorney General of the Nation. The issue began at 8 50 a m yesterday morning, when Dr Amelia Pérez arrived at the Palace of Justice without being announced, Ella, who was until last Thursday the favorite to be elected and already had thirteen votes in her pocket, arrived with her letter of resignation to the eternal, arguing that her aspiration had been shipwrecked because of a foreign opinion. Dr Perez was referring to her husband ' s intemperate and rude triunes, Dr. Gregorio Oviedo, who in the past launched it against various people and institutions from his Twitter account. The letter of his resignation from Dr Amelia Pérez claimed that he was resigning because he was being blamed for the non- existent crime of opinion of others. The truth is that the decision had been made the night before Cua, when she learned through one of the judges, guess who Adriana Camargo Garzón already had the votes to be elected and that the possibilities for her had simply ended until Monday.

2:15 He had told his relatives and even in an interview with the newspaper how long he would not give up. The President of the Supreme Court of Justice read the letter of resignation a few minutes later to his twenty- two companions and began one of the most exciting legal discussions ever. The first to ask for the floor was Judge Luis Antonio Hernández, a member of the Criminal Chamber and a veteran judge who arrived in the Supreme Court after going through all the steps of the judicial career, a brilliant career that will end next April with the completion of his term. Hernández was also the biggest promoter of the name of Adrianna Camargo, since when he had no chance because of his closeness to the Minister of Defense VN. Velázquez, who, despite his distinguished career in the judicial branch, has the animosity of seven judges, whose election he demanded because he considered it to be regulatory. Velázquez lost the lawsuit in the Council of State, but he won the resentment of the seven headdresses, which remains intact until today. In short, Judge Luis Hernández has been a very active voice throughout this election. To clear doubts about the procedure. First, it was he who said that it was not true that the President of the Republic could be disqualified from nominating her as a candidate because her son was being prosecuted by the prosecution. Second, it was Hernández who also agreed to rule out the

3:50 alleged impediments of judges who have family members in the prosecution. Thirdly, it was also Hernández who said that they could not be appointed with judges to elect Attorney General of the Nation. Why judges can only replace the incumbents in judicial work, but not in electoral work, which are administrative in nature. Hernández is one of the most respected voices of the Supreme Court. He was undoubtedly the head of debate of Luz Adriana Camargo from the moment he entered the eternal and said yesterday that Amelia Pérez' s resignation was late, because the Supreme Court of Justice had already begun to vote and it was a consolidated situation.

4:34 That is, in his opinion, the resignation was inane had no effect, there was only one head swinging skeptical. It was Judge Hugo Quintero Bernate, also a member of the Criminal Chamber, and who has been the chief debate of Amailia Pérez Hernández. Citing from memory jurisprudence, he spoke of a famous ruling of the Council of State, whose opponent was the retired magistrate Mario Alario Méndez. This decision states that once the eternal vote begins, it can only be disintegrated by the death or permanent incapacity of one of the aspirants, who always retain the right not to accept the office if they are elected, but cannot unilaterally withdraw their nomination. The next to ask for the floor was the magistrate of the labor room, Luis Benedicto Herrera Díaz. The Doctor. Herrera is a veteran professor of labor law at the Universidad Nacional and Universidad Externado de Colombia. He explained that the constitution and consolidation of the triune to choose Attorney General of the Nation is a non- jurisdictional administrative act, of constitutional origin and complex nature. Herrera presented his thesis explaining how number one the Supreme Court of Justice did not have the competence to accept Amelia Pérez' s resignation, because she was not his nominee. In other words, she was not in

6:08 the chamber by decision of the Court, but by the President of the Republic, as indicated in the national Constitution. The Court' s power was limited to choosing it or not, but could not exclude it by taking it out of the list and therefore could not accept its resignation either. Number two said Judge Herrera that it is the Constitution establishes the complexity of the administrative process of the election of the prosecutor, by the participation of two branches of public power, the executive, because the nomination of the eternal is the function of the President and the judicial branch as the election is a function of the Court. Number three argued Herrera that the President is the nominee and can change the list until the beginning of the voting process, but he cannot do so later, because then it would interfere with the administrative function of choosing that the Court is entrusted with the mandate of the National Constitution. In other words, if the President were to be allowed to resign once the voting process had begun, it would be enough for him to change forever if a candidate other than his favorite were to gain momentum. Judge Luis Benedict Herrera' s argument concluded by saying that neither the Court could accept a resignation from anyone, nor could the President be. Once it was consolidated to the complexity of the administrative act by the beginning of the votes. At the end of the presentation by Judge Luis Benedicto

7:42 Herrera, the Plena Hall made an important silence a few seconds to digest the strength of the arguments of one of the country' s leading laborers. Subsequently, two magistrates, one from the civil division and one from the labour division, asked the floor to tell Limón that, for the exercise of the electoral functions of the Supreme Court of Justice, it would be a bad President if the disintegration of a group of eligible persons depended on the resignation of one who believed that he no longer had the possibility of being elected. For example, the judges of the Supreme Court of Justice are chosen by the court itself from lists sent by the Higher Council of the Judiciary. To stop or make impossible the appointment of a judge, it would be sufficient for any member of the list to resign, which would fill all future elections with legal uncertainty. The discussion lasted until a little after ten in the morning, a little after ten in the morning, and was dispatched by consensus. There was not a single dissenting voice. No matter what Amelia Perez' s letter. The Supreme Court of Justice had the constitutional power to elect for the purpose Attorney General of the Nation. On the agenda of the extraordinary plenary hall only the execution of long and unnecessarily postponed cedeber remained. At some point, it was considered that a

9:13 roll- call vote rather than a secret ballot would be taken. The secret of voting is a right, but not a duty. A public vote could have been made, but the Supreme Court chose the prosecutor light of Diana Camargo, preserving the prudent tradition of secret voting. However, the Colonel report is unable to report the identity of seventeen of the eighteen voters who did so in favor of the new prosecutor. Number one. Luis Antonio Hernández of the Criminal Division. Number two, Jorge Hernán Díaz Soto of the Criminal Division. Number three, Carlos Roberto Solórzano of the Criminal Chamber. Number four, Fernando Bolaños Palacios de la Sala Penal. Number five. Herson Chaverra Castro of the Criminal Chamber and President of the Supreme Court of Justice. Sixth, Gerardo Barbosa of the Criminal Chamber. Until the previous vote he had backed the name of Dr Angel María Buitrago, seventh diego, runner of the Criminal Chamber and who was also with Dr Angel Maria Buitrago until last Thursday eighth, Judge Marta Patricia Guzmán Álvarez of the Civil Chamber, ninth Aroldo Quirós Monsalve of the Civil Chamber,

10:43 tenth, Luis Alonso Rico Puerta de la Sala Civil, eleventh, Francisco José Iiira of the Civil Chamber and who until last Thursday supported Amelia Pérez number two. OmarÁngel Mejía of the 13th working room, Clara Inés López Dávila of the 14th working room. Fernando Castillo Cadena de la salón laboral, number fifteen, mar Jory Zúñiga Romero de la salón laboral number sixteen, Iván Ramiro Es Iván Mauricio Celis de la Sala laboral and who until the penultimate ballot had supported Amelia Pérez number seventeen, Luis Benedicto Herrera de la Sala Laboral, who until last Thursday was with Amelia Pérez. The doubt about voting eighteen to elect the new prosecutor is between the magistrate of the Civil Chamber, Octavio Augusto Tejeiro, and the magistrate of the Labour Chamber, Gerardo Botero Zuluaga, of the failed guardianship against the tern of women. In my opinion, Judge Botero was the only blank vote. The only vote for Judge Amelia Pérez came from her greatest promoter, Judge Hugo Quintero Bernate, who died in his law, voting for her until the last moment. The aspirant Angela Maria bue Trago ended with two

12:18 votes that did not request those of the judge MidianÁvila Roldán of the Criminal Chamber and the magistrate Fernando Augusto Jiménez of the Civil Chamber holds theÁngel María Buitrago in a very respectable way that his resume, otherwise, brilliant. I should talk for her. Only when the vote ended, and the election of Ana Camargo was a fact. Someone asked his interlocutor this decision will be bulletproof in the Council of State and the second answered in the Council of State. There is nothing bulletproof, whatever the trauma of the lawsuits against the election of the Attorney General of the Nation and there will surely be lawsuits. It will take between a year and eighteen months Bonus Track, rightly or without it.

13:13 There is concern in the prosecution over the rumor that the new prosecutor will appoint as a prosecutor someone close to marta mancera the questioned interim prosecutor. According to these speculations, he is a prosecutor delegated to the Tribunal, whose name has been mentioned both in the case of the so- called narco- prosecutors of Cali and in the case of alias Pacho Malo. This was today' s Colonel report. Thank you very much.