The Supreme Court of Justice ordered to grant provisional freedom to the former presidents of the Senate and the House of Representatives, Iván Leonidas Name Vásquez and Andrés David Calle Aguasprosecuted for their alleged participation in the corruption network of the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (Ungrd). The decision was based on the fact that the trial has not ended and that the delays in the process are not attributable to the congressmen or their lawyers.
In an order signed on October 9, 2026the Special Trial Chamber determined that the expected conditions are met in the fifth numeral of the article 365 of Law 600 of 2000 for grant provisional freedom to the two former congressmenaccused of having received resources from the entity in exchange for supporting legislative initiatives of the Government.
One of the arguments that supported the decision is related to the state of the judicial process. As the Court explained, The trial hearing has not yet concluded.Well, the office continues to advance testing practice requested by the defense and Public Ministry.
The Court and the details of the accusation against Name and Calle in the Ungrd case. Photo:Archive
“Until now has not been completed with the holding of the hearing of judgment, to the point that the evidentiary practice that was decreed through provided AEP022-2026 in favor of the defense bench and the Public Ministry,” the ruling stated.
Added to this circumstance is that, according to the magistrates, there are no legal exceptions that would prevent grant freedom to the accused.
“Added to the above, it is noted that none of the described causes occur in paragraph 2 of paragraph 5 of the article 365 of Law 600 of 2000that prevent the granting of freedom”, specified the high court.
The Court examined whether the delays in the development of the trial were due to justified circumstances or to actions of the defendants themselves. On that point, ruled out that Name and Streetor its defenders, would have caused the prolongation of the process.
In the words of the Chamber, “It is not possible to predict that the public hearing is suspended for just or reasonable cause, or that its non-performance has occurred due to cause attributable to the unionized or to their technical defenders.”
name and street Photo:Private file
The judges also clarified that the audience has not yet been installed and they explained that this situation does not constitute negligent action by the officedue to the efforts that have been necessary to incorporate the decreed tests.
“First, because the aforementioned hearing has not been installedwithout it negligence on the part of the Chamber“, indicated the providence.
In its analysis, the Court detailed the actions carried out in recent months to explain why The process continues in the evidentiary stage.
According to the decision, statements have been received from 12 citizens through proceedings carried out by the judicial commission on the days March 16, April 6, May 22 and 28, July 10 and 24, September 24 and October 1, 2026.
In parallel, actions have been taken to obtain the documents what were declared as evidence within the file.
One of the hearings of Iván Name and Andrés Calle. Photo:Supreme Court of Justice
For the Court, these proceedings show that the process has continued its coursewithout identifying conduct by the lawyers or the defendants aimed at prevent the practice of evidentiary material.
“The above, it should be noted, has been carried out without any evidence from the defense -technical and material- the use of delaying maneuvers that would have prevented the efficient evidentiary practice that has been carried out to date by this Chamber,” the Court held.
This analysis was decisive in resolving the requests for freedom, because allowed us to establish that the lack of completion of the trial could not be attributed to a delaying strategy of former congressmen.
For this reason, the high court decided to apply the cause of provisional release contemplated in the procedural legislation.
The seizure and retaking of the Palace of Justice was recorded on November 6 and 7, 1985. Photo:THE TIME
Although the Court granted provisional releaseits materialization was subject to compliance with various judicial conditions.
The first corresponds to payment of a security deposit equivalent to 10 minimum wages current monthly legal regulations, which may be deposited in a judicial deposit account of the Agrarian Bank or constituted by a policy.
The second consists of the subscription of an arbitration proceeding through which Name and Street must assume the established obligations in it article 368 of Law 600 of 2000.
Among those obligations is provide information that allows establishing your location during the development of the judicial process.
The Court warned that Failure to comply with these commitments may result in financial sanctions. and even the revocation of the benefit.
The ruling emphasizes that the defendants “They must provide precise data for their location and that failure to comply with such obligations may lead to the imposition of a fine and the revocation of the freedom granted”.
The 4,000 million pesos that gave rise to the process
The file for which Name and Street were deprived of their liberty emerges from research on the alleged diversion of UNGRD resources for pay bribes to congressmen in exchange for supporting the reforms promoted by the Government.
READ ALSO
According to the facts included in the indictment resolution, The agreement would have been defined during a meeting held in September 2023 in the Nariño Housein which the then director of the Dapre, Carlos Ramón González Merchanand the then Ministers of the Interior, Luis Fernando Velascoand from the Treasury, Ricardo Bonilla.
According to the accusation, in that meeting it would have been agreed that Olmedo Lópezwho directed the Ungrd, obtain the resources to pay the alleged bribes to the then presidents of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
The purpose would have been deliver 3,000 million pesos to Iván Name and others 1,000 million to Andrés Callein exchange for their support of government projects related to pension and health reforms.
The execution of the alleged agreement would have been in charge of Sneyder Pinillathen deputy director of the entity, who, according to the investigation, obtained 4,000 million pesos in cash through a loan made by Pedro José Castro Espinosa.
The reconstruction of the events indicates that the money destined for Name It was delivered on October 12 and 13, 2023 to Sandra Ortizthen presidential advisor for the regions, in the Tequendama Suites hotel in Bogotá.
The deliveries They would have been made in two payments of 1,500 million of pesos, for complete the 3,000 million supposedly destined to the then president of the Senate.
In the case of Andrés Calle, the file maintains that Pinilla traveled on October 14, 2023 to Monteria, Córdobawhere would have delivered 1,000 million directly to the congressman of pesos in cash in his apartment.
The accusation also states that Those resources would have been mobilized later through a cryptocurrency operation carried out in Bogotá.
The money used to finance the alleged bribes, according to the investigation, would have been related to an awarded contract by the Unit Impoamericana Roger SAS for 46.8 billion of pesos for the acquisition of 40 tank cars destined for La Guajira.
The hypothesis of the file indicates that, of the advance received by the contracting company, Luis Eduardo López Rosero would have transferred 5,342 million from pesos to Sneyder Pinilla as consideration for the award of the contract.
Of those resources the money used to pay the loan would have gone out of 4,000 million pesos, along with an interest of 2.3 percent, in January 2024.
Olmedo López was the director of the UNGRD and is linked to the corruption scandal. Photo:César Melgarejo / El Tiempo
Another of the elements included in the accusation resolution corresponds to the alleged knowledge that Name and Street had about the origin of the resources.
In the case of the former president of the Chamber, the file indicates that On September 23, 2023, he met with Olmedo López in the latter’s office.
During that meeting, López would have written on a piece of paper that 1,000 million would be delivered of pesos per order of Carlos Ramón Gonzálezwho by then directed the Dapre.
Regarding Iván Name, the accusation indicates that would have known the public origin of the resources he September 25, 2023when he held a meeting in the Tequendama Suites hotel with Sandra Ortiz and Olmedo Lopez.
These facts are part of the accusation that the Special Trial Chamber must examine during the trial.
Justice Editorial
Justicia@eltiempo.com
