Other bad/good news

romy says on May 9, 2008, 15:58:

I am not prepared for this. I hope Colombia is ready for it. Truly, this can be catastrophic for the country. I hope the transition can run smoothly.

Cerealkiller says on May 9, 2008, 16:11:

I hate to say I'm confident in that the vast majority of the Colombian population is ready to completely ignore this, pretend it did not happen, justify it by saying "this is how politics work" and keep begging Uribe to run for a third term.
From what I've read on other threads I can gather the consensus here is the following : Colombia is a country with 44 million inept people running around in taparrabos, otherwise we would have a long list of talented, hardworking, honest and educated leaders willing to take over (that was a half-joke by the way). That would totally explain why we need another term of Uribe. How did I miss that?

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

romy says on May 9, 2008, 16:15:

I hope not CK, that would shatter my belief in Colombia.

Cerealkiller says on May 9, 2008, 16:17:

Well Romy, take it lightly and lets make a bet. Your belief in Colombia vs. the most likely scenario. How much are you willing to risk?

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

romy says on May 9, 2008, 16:22:

name the terms...
is it if Uribe gets elected for a 3rd term you win and if he doesn't I win?

Cerealkiller says on May 9, 2008, 16:28:

No, I do believe re-re-election is too complicated and chances are you'd be in for an easy win (sadly not due to public opinion, but procedural complications). Lets make the bet on the basis of popularity: If Uribe's popularity drops to 55% you win.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

romy says on May 9, 2008, 16:36:

yeaaahh NO, that's an easy win for you! People will still love him of course, I was relying on the "procedural complications" and it's these I have faith on. Sadly it's true there are a lot of ignorant people in the country, and then there are a good percentage of people that truly benefit from Uribe's policies and don't care about the people that get marginilized (and don't care about the integrity of the nation's democracy)

Cerealkiller says on May 9, 2008, 16:40:

Come on Romy, where's the faith in the country? :P

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

romy says on May 9, 2008, 16:46:

Hey! I love my country despite the Uribistas here calling me a traitor...

too bad no bet. I was trying to think of what we could actually bet with.

Cerealkiller says on May 9, 2008, 16:59:

Yeah me too, but sometimes just the satisfaction of knowing you were right is enough reward.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

romy says on May 9, 2008, 17:06:

next time then, though I don't remember a time I blatently disagreed with you... just minor things

juancegomez says on May 9, 2008, 18:53:

While it is possible...I am not too certain that we can speak of a "transition" at this point, let alone what kind...even if a crime has occurred.

That Medina did in fact "sell" her vote, or was otherwise "convinced", may not be hard to prove. But what matters are the judicial ramifications of it.

Two years, what is left in Uribe's term, may not be much but it's still a long time in relative terms. A lot could still happen, either to save him or to doom him.

Judicially speaking, I say, since his political armor is still very resistant.

While Uribe appears to be threatened right now, he will have the chance to defend himself in Congress and, if applicable, in Court.

And so will everyone else who has been rightfully or wrongfully implicated. If Medina's testimony falls apart before certain details, and it seems she hasn't been that consistent in a couple of places (she is no angel or mere victim of circumstance), the resulting responsibilities will vary accordingly.

romy says on May 10, 2008, 02:44:

Juance, if she was proven guilty, who was buying her vote? Does that in itself not prove a crime anyways? or was the article completely off-base by your standards?

juancegomez says on May 10, 2008, 09:50:

romy: The article is fair enough for what it is, but one of the details that readers may overlook is this: the process has to go through at least four or five different jurisdictions. See below:

-----------------------------------------

Mayo 9 de 2008 -
En cinco escenarios judiciales se ventilará caso de supuesto pago a Yidis Medina por reelección

En la Fiscalía, la Comisión de Acusaciones, el Consejo de la Judicatura, la Procuraduría y la Corte Suprema de Justicia ya se comenzó a mover el trámite del proceso.

La Corte se prepara para entrar en el último tramo del proceso contra Yidis.

Le negó la detención domiciliaria, entre otras razones porque en su primer encuentro con la Corte, hace cuatro años, dio una versión radicalmente opuesta a la que ahora está entregando.

Ahora, los magistrados de la Sala Penal deben dar un concepto sobre su solicitud de sentencia anticipada, un paso que se hará después de que quede en firme la medida de aseguramiento de este jueves.

Según los magistrados, la ex congresista ocultó durante todo este tiempo las pruebas de que habría vendido su voto y la supuesta intervención de funcionarios públicos que la indujeron a tomar esa decisión.

Esa primera versión llevó a la Corte a disponer el archivo del proceso, que se reactivó hace apenas un mes tras varias declaraciones de Yidis y el anuncio de un libro sobre la reelección.

Por esta razón, los miembros del alto tribunal creen que en libertad, la ex congresista estaría en "capacidad potencial" de interferir con la acción de la justicia.

La Procuraduría, por lo pronto, reabrió el proceso disciplinario que el año pasado le había cerrado a Medina por el tema de la reelección y evalúa la apertura de procesos disciplinarios contra algunos de los funcionarios mencionados por ella ante la Corte.

El Consejo de la Judicatura, por su lado, está a la espera de la notificación formal de la Corte sobre dos abogados que, según la versión de Yidis, el Gobierno puso a su disposición para que la asesoraran ante la Corte, el Consejo de Estado y la Corte Suprema después de la votación del 2004.

Y el vicefiscal general, Guillermo Mendoza Diago, se prepara para evaluar el proceso remitido por la Corte en el caso del ex ministro y embajador Sabas Pretelt y el ministro Diego Palacio.

Lo que sigue en la Corte Suprema

La Sala Penal llamará a Medina para determinar en un acta de cargos la gravedad del delito, la condena a imponer, la reducciones de la pena y su sitio de reclusión.

Esto se presenta a consideración de los magistrados, que en decisión colegiada decidirán con base en la validez de su confesión y las pruebas que aportó al caso.

La Corte investiga de manera paralela la actuación seguida por el ex representante Teodolindo Avendaño y está estableciendo si existen méritos para iniciar una investigación contra el senador Iván Díaz Matéus, el titular de la curul que Yidis ocupó transitoriamente hace cuatro años.

Las versiones que dio ella sobre la participación de ambos en los hechos son el insumo básico con el que cuenta la Corte.

En la Comisión de Acusaciones

La Corte aclaró el pasado jueves que no pidió investigar al presidente �?lvaro Uribe sino que envió las copias de las declaraciones de Yidis Medina para que se anexen a una demanda que entabló el senador del Polo Luis Carlos Avellaneda por supuestas irregularidades en el trámite de la reelección.

En el caso de la denuncia del senador, la Comisión no ha nombrado aún un investigador y evalúa si designa un triunvirato de representantes para que haga la investigación.

Las cuentas que hace Yidis

Por colaboración con la justicia y la valoración que los magistrados hicieron de las pruebas aportadas por Yidis, su defensa hace cálculos de unos tres años en prisión, pues el delito por el que está procesada -cohecho- tiene una pena de entre cinco y ocho años.

Podría atravesarse, sin embargo, una situación sobre la que habló ayer el abogado Jaime Lombana, apoderado del ministro Diego Palacio, uno de los mencionados por la ex congresista. Lombana dijo que la Corte debe "ampliar las imputaciones en contra de Yidis por los delitos de concusión, fraude procesal, falsa denuncia, falso testimonio y, especialmente, por secuestro".

Ella admite que mintió en sus primeras versiones ante la Corte Suprema y la Procuraduría y que 'amarró' a sus cuotas burocráticas a través de pagarés y cartas de renuncia firmadas anticipadamente. Esas investigaciones serían de competencia de la Fiscalía General y no de la Corte.

Lo que le toca al Vicefiscal

Tras la remisión de copias desde la Corte, la decisión de abrir investigación contra el ex ministro y embajador Sabas Pretelt y el ministro de Protección, Diego Palacio, quedará en manos del vicefiscal Guillermo Mendoza Diago.

Por competencia, la investigación la debía llevar el fiscal general, Mario Iguarán, quien ya anunció que se declarará impedido para conocer de los hechos porque fue subalterno de Sabas Pretelt.

Los casos de los demás funcionarios que resulten implicados pasarían a un fiscal ordinario. En caso de una recusación o un eventual impedimento del Vicefiscal General para conocer del proceso, la Corte entraría a resolver. De admitirlo, nombraría un fiscal Ad hoc.

REDACCIÓN JUSTICIA

http://www.eltiempo.com/justicia/2008-05-10/ARTICULO-PRINTER_FRIENDLY-...
------------

It is reasonable to suppose that the specific results of each judicial instance will be different, even if they have to follow a general line of thought.

At first glance I would agree with you, that simply proving that the vote was "bought" would seem to be enough to declare it a crime. And it probably is.

But there is a rather large Pandora's Box waiting behind it. What was really offered, who is responsible for it, and how much of it can be considered to be criminal in nature? She has named many officials, yes, although that doesn't mean that all of them will be found guilty.

Let us not forget that Yidis herself is not a mere witness, but in fact one of the accused, in part through self-incrimination and also because she previously lied to the Supreme Court. That means she has to be scrutinized, not automatically believed, even if she did let herself be illegally "convinced".

And what does this mean for reelection or for any other measure that Medina may have voted for (if applicable)? Outside logic would indicate that such votes should be considered null and invalid, but judicial logic may not necessarily agree, to an extent. Or to put it another way, even if the process that led to the approval of reelection is declared illegal, that doesn't automatically mean that Uribe will lose his presidential seat right now. Reelection could be removed from the Constitution, but it may not be retroactively nullified. Frankly, we would need to be constitutional judges in order to reach a real conclusion.

romy says on May 10, 2008, 10:02:

Thanks a lot I truly learn a lot from you...
"And what does this mean for reelection or for any other measure that Medina may have voted for (if applicable)? Outside logic would indicate that such votes should be considered null and invalid, but judicial logic may not necessarily agree, to an extent."
are you aware of any other votes that were as close as the re-election vote that may have been 'comprimised'?

juancegomez says on May 10, 2008, 10:22:

Not that I can recall, so probably not...although the press isn't exactly helpful at this time, but if there is anything else, then the same potential problem would result.