The request for indictment and security measures against former ministers Ricardo Bonilla and Luis Fernando Velasco marked a new chapter in the legal proceedings related to the corruption scandal in the National Disaster Risk Management Unit (Ungrd).
Led by the country’s Attorney General, Luz Adriana Camargo, the Public Prosecutor’s Office filed the formal request with the Bogotá Supreme Court to indict both former officials and, if the request is granted, remain in a prison under deprivation of liberty during the trial.
You can now continue following us Facebook and in ours WhatsApp channel
The team of prosecutors sent to the Supreme Court in charge of the macro-investigation attributes Bonilla and Velasco with the alleged commission of three crimes: aggravated conspiracy, unreasonable interest in the execution of contracts and bribery in giving or offering.
According to the public prosecutor’s office, the seriousness of the facts and the nature of the crimes justify the request for a restrictive measure of freedom.
Regarding the possible criminal consequences, Fabio Humar, managing partner of Fabio Humar Abogados, explained that the former ministers could face prison sentences of more than twelve or fifteen years if convicted.
Humar told the media that “there would be a series of crimes in this case,” he said Legal matters, This means that the punishment is determined not by arithmetic addition of the penalties for each crime, but by applying the dosage rules established in Articles 60, 61 and 62 of the Colombian Penal Code..
These rules require consideration of factors such as the seriousness of the matter, the nature of the competition and the existence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
The crime of conspiracy provided for in Article 340 of the Penal Code In its basic form, there is a maximum penalty of one hundred and eight months (nine years) in prison.
However, Juan Francisco Navarrete, partner of Navarrete Consultores, explained this “If it is a conspiracy to commit an offense specifically related to the offenses referred to in the second paragraph, the penalty may be up to two hundred sixteen months (eighteen years) and may be increased by up to half for those who organize, promote, direct, direct, constitute or finance this conspiracy.”said the lawyer to the above-mentioned media.
In addition, Navarrete pointed out that if officials intervene or the crime is related to smuggling, The penalty can be up to one hundred and forty-four months (twelve years) in prison.. The law also provides for the imposition of fines of up to 30,000 applicable legal minimum wages per month.
The prosecutor’s office believes that the complexity of the case and the variety of crimes charged justify the seriousness of the measures requested, as former ministers Bonilla and Velasco prepare for a trial that could lead to long prison sentences and heavy economic sanctions.
Lawyer Mauricio Pava, defender of Ricardo Bonilla, assured, according to statements from, that the former Minister of Finance did not sign a contract for the development of the projects managed by the Ministry The FM.
Pava emphasized that the defense relies on the testimony of Alejandra Benavides, adviser to the ministry, who stated this after 50 hours of testimony in court “This is not about briefcases of money” or commissions or contracts.
The lawyer clarified that the security measure is a separate matter and that the imputation hearing defines the legal scope of the facts attributed to Bonilla.
He added that the former minister had surrendered his passport during the impeachment process and had to remain in Colombia for economic and health reasons. Aside from that, The defense requested that Bonilla’s financial transactions be examined to confirm his financial situation.
Regarding the messages between Bonilla and UNGRD officials, Pava claimed that he “never asked about contracts” and that the chats only referred to projects and not contractual agreements.
He insisted “In the case of Professor Bonilla there is no single contract” and that the department is required by law to review the progress of regional projects, while members of Congress can deliberate on them under the Fifth Act.
Pava emphasized that the defense distinguishes between ethical, disciplinary or political debates and what corresponds to criminal law, which only judges material actions.
He explained that although the projects had been in progress before, the authority to enter into contracts rested with the Ungrd and not with the Ministry of Finance.
Regarding the financing of the defense, he pointed out that the fees come from insurance policies that protect public servants under the presumption of innocence as long as the legal status of the person under investigation is preserved.
About The Author
