Este viernes se toman decisiones cruciales en el proceso contra Álvaro Uribe

0:00 In the WU the Colonel report, the colonel report that arrives with a very important advance on what will happen in exactly thirty minutes from eight in the morning. Before Daniel, congratulations on that good news from yesterday and forward with what will be news today. Thank you, John Paul. It really is a dream day, a day that many times was elusive and that finally arrived good days. This is the Colonel report. In a few minutes at eight o ' clock in the morning, a new session of the indictment hearing will begin for former President Alvaro Uribe, as alleged perpetrator of the crimes of bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud, Judge Forty- four Criminal Court of the Circuit of Bogotá. Sandra Liliana Heredia Arana handled the first audience with an iron hand.

1:00 She led a 13- hour session, did not authorize postponements or long recesses. He strongly drew the attention of the parties and the delegate procurator and showed his determination to prevent further delaying manoeuvres, such as those that have prolonged this process in the heads of all the participants for years. There' s a date October seven out of two thousand twenty- five. If there is no decision on the case on that day, the former President Uribe will be covered by the statute of limitations of criminal proceedings. He will not be innocent, but neither will he be guilty and in that precarious condition would end so many years of recent evidence and successive postponements. Well, today the judge heredia has to make two decisions that will substantially affect the course of the trial. First, whether or not you agree to the nullity of the proceedings requested by the defense. Secondly, it recognizes all victims who have acted in the initial stages prior to the call to trial. The two determinations will be crucial to bring the case closer or closer to the expiry of prescription terms of criminal proceedings.

2:14 The application for annulment has already been invoked by the defense of former President Alvaro Uribe for two reasons. They argue that we cannot establish equivalence between inquiry and imputation and, consequently, we must cancel the act and start over. This argument stems from the transition from the Supreme Court of Justice process to the prosecution and from the fact that each institution applied a different code of criminal procedure. Uribe' s defense case has been defeated before the fourth criminal judge of the circuit, who declared that it is equivalent to investigation and imputation, or otherwise the defendant would simply resign from the Senate in order to annul the proceedings.

3:01 Attorney Jaime Granados then filed a tutelage with the Bogotá High Court, which he also lost. This guardianship was reviewed by the Constitutional Court, where it was also expired. However, in each of those steps, time went by and the case approached the prescription, which seems to be the real strategy of the former president' s defense. The other part of the nullity has to do with the April telephone interceptions, according to his defense, are illegal because they violate the client lawyer relationship. However, the so- called Aboganster Diego Cadena was never a lawyer for the former president in the process. If the mere presence of a lawyer was sufficient to prevent the use of a crime hearing, criminal organizations would simply have to include a lawyer in their communications to make them untouchable. Judicially, this argument has also been lost by the defense of former President Uribe before the Supreme Court of Justice, before two women judges who denied the preclusion eagerly sought by Francisco Barbosa' s deputy prosecutors and before the Bogotá Court. In a few minutes, Judge Sandra Liliana Heredia Arana will have to demonstrate again about these repeated allegations and has three options. The first is to accept them, which seems to go from any legal logic and would be appealed to the decision before the High Court of Bogotá, which would produce a long

4:34 period of months very useful to the defense' s prescription strategy. Secondly, the second alternative is to make a thorough statement on those arguments. By denying this statement of substance it would end up being reviewed by the Tribunal and the time again acting in favour of the statute of limitations sought by the former President ' s bench. The third option is to deny it outright a decision on which no recourse would operate and to close the transition to delaying strategy. As for the recognition of the victims. The judge may deny this status to some of the persons who have been provisionally accepted in the previous instances. Senator Iván sepeda Janira Gómez' s doctor as the wife of witness Juan Guillermo monsalve Or the sex prosecutors general Eduardo Montealegri and Jorge Perdón. If such a decision contrary to the alleged victims occurred, it would have to be examined by the Bogotá Court. But unlike nullity, the process could move forward as long as the Court decides. Another of today' s highlights is the intervention of former President Alvaro Uribe, who has been publishing videos with his unbiased version of the facts, insulting judges and witnesses and opposing the evidence. The former President has asked the judge to speak in a voice of the material defense wave. Although it is debatable that she can intervene procedurally at this time, the judge decided to

6:09 grant her that right in all confidence. The participation of the only former president prosecuted for criminal charges in the history of Colombia will not be indifferent if the judge denies everything requested and repeatedly discarded in other judicial instances. The next step will be the pre- trial hearing of the subyu says former President. This was today' s Colonel report. Thank you very much.