Colombian leader (Uribe) accuses judge of bribing witness

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) -- Colombian President Alvaro Uribe publicly accused a Supreme Court judge of bribing a jailed warlord into testifying that Uribe plotted to murder another paramilitary chief.

In a short statement Monday and later in a radio interview, Uribe said auxiliary Judge Ivan Velasquez and another investigator for the chief prosecutor's office offered Jose Orlando Moncada unspecified benefits for himself and his family if he denounced the president.

Supreme Court president Cesar Julio Valencia promptly rejected the accusations, calling them an obstruction of justice in the high court's ongoing investigation into links between the paramilitaries and the government's congressional allies.

"The Supreme Court has not acted improperly," said Valencia, who would not say whether Moncada, better known by his alias Tasmania, had testified against the president. "The high court views the president's statement as a clear obstruction of our work in the so called para-politics scandal."

Uribe said his office received a letter from Moncada in which he said Velasquez pressured him to say Uribe ordered the murder of Alcides de Jesus Durango, a paramilitary chief in Colombia's banana-growing Gulf of Uraba region. He also said he had "knowledge" of Moncada's testimony last week.

"I am simply asking prosecutors to investigate these grave accusations," said Uribe, who also denied ever having any contact with Moncada or Durango.

Durango was captured by security forces in June and is presumably in the custody of Colombian authorities. He was one of the government's most wanted fugitives after failing to demobilize under a government peace plan in 2005 with fighters belonging to his southwestern bloc of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a paramilitary umbrella group.

By Rob77 on Oct 9, 2007, 11:01 in Politics & the war.

juancegomez says on Oct 9, 2007, 13:02:

I heard practically the whole thing live on the radio (both Uribe and the judge spoke via Caracol Radio) yesterday night.

Unless this is all part of some elaborate plot, Uribe never actually made the accusation himself and thus there's no way such a description can be defended.

You may say that he's taking advantage of it or reacting improperly, I would definitely agree with that, but this detail is important.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Oct 9, 2007, 13:14:

Juance: I'm reading something very different in El Tiempo. It provides a textual quote of Uribe making an explicit accusation, and references to him saying that he has evidence (could THAT be true?), a letter or something like that.

Apparently the Fiscalia is coming in and taking the accusation quite seriously. Good! If the accusation has merit, it should be fully investigated. If it doesn't, the President should be severely and exemplarily sanctioned. No more of this bullshit.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Oct 9, 2007, 14:12:

SrTertius: Let's get straight to the point. I've been to the two main EL TIEMPO articles and don't see what you're describing (or not identifying it as such), so if possible please quote the phrase. Ideally in context, but if not it's fine too.

Maybe you're talking about this bit, which is actually part of a larger communique (which, btw, wasn't actually read by Uribe, though that's just a minor detail):

-Según la denuncia de Uribe, "funcionarios del CTI de Antioquia y delegados de la Corte habían contactado, en la cárcel de Itagüí, a José Orlando Moncada Zapata ('Tasmania') para que acusara al Presidente y a otros ciudadanos como autores intelectuales del atentado (en el 2003) contra el 'para' Alcides Durango, 'René', a cambio de beneficios".

But here's the entire communique, placing the above text in context:

"Comunicado

La Casa de Nariño se permite informar que el Presidente de la República ha tenido conocimiento de una diligencia de declaración que rindió el señor Jose Orlando Moncada Zapata, alias ‘Tasmania’, ante una comisión de la Fiscalía General de la Nación, los días 4 y 5 de octubre pasado, así como el contenido de una comunicación previa a la diligencia, mediante la cual se indica que funcionarios del CTI de Antioquia y delegados de la Corte Suprema de Justicia habían contactado, en la cárcel de máxima seguridad de Itagüí, a este señor, para que acusara al Presidente Alvaro Uribe Vélez y a otros ciudadanos como autores intelectuales del atentado contra el paramilitar Alcides de Jesús Durango, alias ‘René’, en 2003, a cambio de beneficios para él y su familia.

En la carta que recibió el Presidente, antes mencionada, alias ‘Tasmania’ cuenta cómo fue abordado en la cárcel de Itagüí y llevado a las instalaciones de la Fiscalía, en Antioquia, en donde el Magistrado Iván Velásquez le ofreció beneficios a él y a su familia, a cambio de declarar en contra del Presidente Uribe.

Conocedor de esta situación, el Presidente de la República solicita al Fiscal General, quien tiene en su poder todas las declaraciones y los expedientes, que adelante las gestiones a que haya lugar, con el fin de verificar los hechos por este señor denunciados y, en todo caso, para que se haga absoluta claridad de las circunstancias que han rodeado este episodio.

El Presidente de la República reitera que nunca ha tenido ningún tipo de relación con los sujetos mencionados en este incidente.

Bogotá, 8 de octubre de 2007."

He may later be accusing the magistrate or the Court of something else, of obstructing justice in response to what they said about him (his doing just that) or what not, but I'm speaking about the main event here: the alleged (most likely fake, if you ask me) bribing.

Uribe's aggressively making all of this public and pushing for an investigation into the contents and claims found in the letter he apparently received, yeah, but that's not identical to his making the accusation per se. I didn't hear that yesterday night, at least.

The letter in itself is only evidence of the existence of the accusations made by the third party, the paramilitary himself.

Doesn't mean Uribe's the one behind them, legally or realistically speaking (again, unless it's all part of a plot set up beforehand).

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Oct 9, 2007, 14:33:

This is the (IMHO, probably not based on real events and likely a lie) letter;

----------------------------
Texto de la carta enviada por José Orlando Moncada Zapata, alias "Tasmania" al presidente Alvaro Uribe

Medellín, septiembre 11 de 2007

Señor Presidente

Doctor

Alvaro Uribe Vélez

Por medio de la presente, pongo en conocimiento suyo lo siguiente:

ALBERTO JIMENEZ MORANTES y JACKELINE GÓMEZ VARGAS, funcionarios de la fiscalía general de la nación, me ofrecieron, en nombre de la CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA,en el mes de agosto del presente año, en la C�?RCEL DE M�?XIMA SEGURIDAD DE ITAGÜ�?, beneficios como rebaja de condena, protección de testigo y ubicación de familia, a cambio de información sobre la autoría intelectual del Presidente de la República Alvaro Uribe en un atentado contra Rene, ex miembro de las AUC, en el mes de septiembre de 2003.

Mi defensor se comunico con los citados Jiménez y Gómez y se concertó una cita personal en la ciudad de Medellín, la cual se realizo el pasado 10 de septiembre del año en curso, en el palacio de justicia, piso 21, en el despacho de la Fiscalia 8a. Especializada. A la reunión asistimos IVAN VELASQUEZ, magistrado auxiliar de la Corte, una señora de la cual no recuerdo el nombre, mi defensor y yo.

El citado Iván Velásquez, magistrado auxiliar de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, me ratifico el ofrecimiento de los beneficios a que aludieron los funcionarios de la fiscalía, siempre y cuando vinculara al presidente Alvaro Uribe y a Ernesto Garcés Soto al atentado contra Rene, ex comandante de las Auc en el suroeste de Antioquia, lo mismo que declarara en contra de Mario Uribe, senador, sobre el apoyo a grupos paramilitares en la zona del suroeste de Antioquia.

Mi defensor anunció que se comunicaría con el magistrado Iván Velásquez, quien le dio un número telefónico, el cual suministraré si fuere necesario.

Mi preocupación, señor presidente, es que el señor Velásquez, según me parece, lo quiere perjudicar. Es lo único que le interesa. A cambio entrega lo que sea.

JOSE ORLANDO MONCADA ZAPATA

cc. 98451762

http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/490969.asp

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Rob77 says on Oct 9, 2007, 15:17:

That's a very telling letter.

BOYCOTT CITGO - CHAVEZ SUCKS!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Oct 9, 2007, 18:35:

You are right: Uribe himself is not making the accusation (I stand corrected) but is soliciting the Fiscalia to investigate in a public way.

This doesn't amount to the false accusations that the government has done in the past but seems to be unnecessarily (and intentionally) distracting. We'll see how this develops.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Oct 9, 2007, 19:09:

I'm in agreement with questioning the way Uribe is handling this by making it public, at the very least seeking his own convenience first and foremost.

I can also agree with Mr. Vivanco's conclusion here:
--------------------------
Colombia: Uribe Must Respect Judicial Independence
President’s Interference with Ongoing Investigations Threatens the Rule of Law

(New York, October 9, 2007) – Colombian President Alvaro Uribe’s interference with investigations conducted by the Colombian Supreme Court and his repeated attacks on the court itself are a threat to judicial independence, Human Rights Watch said today.

Yesterday, Uribe issued a public statement calling for an investigation into allegations that a Supreme Court justice, Iván Velásquez, had sought to persuade an imprisoned individual to provide testimony implicating the president in an assassination. Uribe stated that he had received a letter from this individual denouncing the justice’s actions.

Uribe also stated that he directly called Justice Velásquez, to ask him about the allegation. Velásquez is the head of the Supreme Court team charged with investigating links between politicians and abusive paramilitary groups.

“Against all odds, Colombia’s Supreme Court has been making unprecedented progress in investigating links between paramilitaries and politicians close to the president," said José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. “President Uribe’s phone call to the judge charged with these highly sensitive investigations amounts to political pressure that could intimidate the court and affect the outcome of the cases.�?

Dozens of Congressmen from Uribe’s coalition, including the president’s own cousin, Senator Mario Uribe, are currently under investigation by the Supreme Court for their alleged collaboration with drug-running paramilitaries responsible for widespread atrocities. Fourteen Congressmen are already under arrest as a result.

Uribe’s statements come on the heels of a report published by the leading Colombian newsweekly Semana about the Supreme Court’s investigation of phone calls by some of the imprisoned Congressmen, in which they appeared to be plotting to pay off witnesses and public officials and destroy evidence against them.

The Supreme Court has defended Justice Velásquez, and called for an investigation of possible obstruction of justice by the president. Velásquez, who has served for two decades in the judiciary, has vigorously denied any effort to involve Uribe in the investigations, noting that in any case the Congress – not the Supreme Court – is the institution charged with investigating the president.

Newspaper reports suggest that Justice Velásquez’s account of events has been corroborated by a prosecutor who is reported to have witnessed Velásquez’s interview with the imprisoned individual in the course of ongoing investigations. This prosecutor is reported to have stated that President Uribe was never mentioned in the interview.

Human Rights Watch noted that Uribe has a disturbing record of making aggressive statements against the courts and media outlets that are investigating his administration and political cronies.

Earlier this year, when the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution forbade pardoning the crime of forming paramilitary groups, Uribe railed against the court, accusing it of having an “ideological bias." Previously he had lashed out against prominent Colombian media when they had revealed allegations that Uribe’s former intelligence chief, Jorge Noguera, had collaborated with paramilitaries.

Just last week, Uribe accused El Nuevo Herald journalist Gonzalo Guillén of seeking to smear him in a book by Virginia Vallejo, the former lover of notorious Medellín drug cartel chief Pablo Escobar. Vallejo asserts in the book that Escobar had introduced her to Uribe. Guillén, who has written about links between the Uribe administration and paramilitaries, and who received serious threats on his life earlier this year, has stated that he had nothing to do with Vallejo’s book or the allegations therein. Because of death threats he received after being criticized by Uribe, Guillén said that he planned to leave Colombia on Saturday.

“In a country like Colombia, where journalists and judges have often been killed because of their investigations, the president should exercise the utmost care to avoid even the appearance of intimidating them or putting them in jeopardy," said Vivanco.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/10/09/colomb17057.htm

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Oct 10, 2007, 08:17:

BoyHowdy: I'm hardly saying Uribe is 100% unrelated to them, no, but it's not like everything he does automatically *requires* a specific X level of involvement in paramilitarism in each and every case, however. I prefer to look at things from a less narrow and predetermined perspective, one that isn't so full of voluntarism.

cassini77 : Depends on what you're really talking about. Nobody in the rest of the world would have allegedly "known" (if anyone can truly claim that they "know", which implies a lot of things) anything at all were it not for Colombians who had previously made allegations here, and the rest of the world mostly gets a few select ideas and claims that it doesn't bother to investigate or nuance further. Case in point.

0 funny, 0 helpful.