Ex-Colombia president questioned on witness tampering

Former president Alvaro Uribe arrives to the Supreme Court for questioning in a case an involving witness tampering in Bogota, Colombia, Tuesday, Oct. 8, 2019. (AP)
Updated 09 October 2019

Ex-Colombia president questioned on witness tampering

  • The ex-chief of state has denied all accusations of ties to the paramilitaries
  • Uribe has persistently denied those charges and was an unwavering US ally in the war on drugs during his 2002-2010 presidency

BOGOTA, Colombia: Powerful former President Alvaro Uribe appeared before Colombia’s Supreme Court on Tuesday for questioning in a case involving alleged witness tampering that could potentially cast a dark shadow over is legacy.

A magistrate queried Uribe behind closed doors for over seven hours about accusations that, through a lawyer, he tried to influence and even bribe members of a paramilitary group who had damaging information against him.

After the questioning, the court released a brief statement announcing that officials had concluded there were sufficient grounds to continue investigating Uribe, though no charges have been filed.

“I defended my loyalty to the truth,” Uribe said in a lengthy address to supporters that stretched late into the evening. The case stems from allegations raised by Sen.

Ivan Cepeda, who claims he has firsthand witness accounts that Uribe was a founding leader of a paramilitary group in his home province during the decades-long civil conflict involving government forces, leftist rebels and right-wing bands.

The ex-chief of state has denied all accusations of ties to the paramilitaries, who are accused of drug trafficking, killing innocents and driving thousands from their homes or lands while fighting rebels.

The case has divided the South American nation and set off demonstrations both in favor of and against the ex-president.

Political analysts are also watching it as an important test for Colombia’s justice system, which throughout its history has struggled to hold prominent political and military leaders accountable.

“It’s crucial that Colombia’s justice system handles this with professional, dispassionate rigor so that it doesn’t devolve into a circus,” said Adam Isacson, a Colombia expert with the Washington Office on Latin American think tank.

Perhaps no political leader in Colombia’s recent history has wielded as much influence as Uribe, who still has legions of followers.

He led the “no” campaign that preceded Colombian voters rejecting a peace accord with leftist rebels in 2016, though the government later adopted a slightly revised version. Last year, Uribe’s support lifted a little-known senator, Ivan Duque, to the presidency.

But allegations of ties to drug cartels and paramilitaries have dogged him since the early 1980s, when the civil aviation agency he led was accused of giving air licenses to drug traffickers. Declassified State Department cables from a decade later show US officials were told the up-and-coming politician had ties to cartels.

Uribe has persistently denied those charges and was an unwavering US ally in the war on drugs during his 2002-2010 presidency.

He extradited a record number of suspected drug traffickers to the US and aggressively expanded a US program to aerially spray wide swaths of illegal coca crops with chemical herbicide.

“I never thought my defense of honor and love for Colombia, with respect for citizens and in accordance with the Constitution, would create legal problems for me,” Uribe said Monday.

His court appearance stems from allegations that Cepeda made in 2014 during a debate in Congress over Uribe’s alleged paramilitary ties. Cepeda claimed he had accounts from two ex-combatants confirming the association.

Uribe in turn accused Cepeda of slander, but the Supreme Court later dismissed the case, instead opening an investigation into the ex-president.

The case hinges largely on statements by former paramilitary fighter Juan Guillermo Monsalve, who claims Uribe helped form a branch of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, an umbrella paramilitary group.

Monsalve alleges a lawyer for Uribe, Diego Cadena, pressured him to retract his statement. A second ex-paramilitary has also alleged that Cadena paid him to testify in favor of the former president.

Many Colombians are either devout Uribe loyalists who praise his iron-fisted approach to defeating leftist rebels while president or skeptics who have long wanted to see the former leader in court.

“Whether they convict him or absolve him, half of all Colombians will be angry,” the newsweekly Semana recently wrote.

Uribe’s legal woes are also mingled with frustrations over the peace deal with leftist guerrillas. Most ex-rebels will serve no jail time if they fully confess any crimes, an offer that irks many Colombians. Several former rebel commanders are serving in Congress, another stipulation of the fragile accord.

Uribe acolytes like Sen. Paloma Valencia complain the judicial system is letting ex-combatants accused of multiple, grave human rights violations off easy while interrogating a popular former president.

“It’s surprising that who is being called to court is a leader who has represented the majority of Colombians in recent years,” she told the newspaper El Tiempo.

As Uribe arrived at the Palace of Justice, surrounded by six bodyguards, several hundred people gathered outside chanting phrases against him, including, “The people are angry!“

“Let the court deliver justice,” said Marta Delgado, a housewife holding up a white poster with the words, “I support the Supreme Court.”

About 50 police officers stood guard in front of the historic building, where a 1985 attack by leftist M19 guerrillas — and a heavy-handed police and military response — left over 100 people dead.

A smaller group yelled out in favor of Uribe, crying, “We are with you!” “He’s always looked after the wellbeing of Colombians,” said Luis Munera, who runs a cattle and fruit tree farm. “I can’t accept him being branded a paramilitary.”

In his evening address, Uribe delivered a detailed account stretching more than an hour explaining why he is innocent and reminding Colombians of his accomplishments in defeating guerrillas and reducing crime.

He included seemingly unrelated details, like the charcuterie he brought to a political event, while also touching on the current president’s environmental policy and the neurological impacts of drug use.

Regarding the questioning by the court, he said he has “tranquility” in knowing that he defended the truth and expressed reverence for the magistrate who interrogated him.

“I have no complaints,” Uribe said. “He should have observed my respect for justice.”


Biden selects California Sen. Kamala Harris as running mate

Updated 12 August 2020

Biden selects California Sen. Kamala Harris as running mate

  • Joe Biden: I have the great honor to announce that I’ve picked @KamalaHarris — a fearless fighter for the little guy, and one of the country’s finest public servants — as my running mate
  • Trump’s uneven handling of crises has given Biden an opening, and he enters the fall campaign in strong position against the president

WILMINGTON, Delaware: Joe Biden named California Sen. Kamala Harris as his running mate on Tuesday, making history by selecting the first Black woman to compete on a major party’s presidential ticket and acknowledging the vital role Black voters will play in his bid to defeat President Donald Trump.
“I have the great honor to announce that I’ve picked @KamalaHarris — a fearless fighter for the little guy, and one of the country’s finest public servants — as my running mate,” Biden tweeted. In a text message to supporters, Biden said, “Together, with you, we’re going to beat Trump”
In choosing Harris, Biden is embracing a former rival from the Democratic primary who is familiar with the unique rigor of a national campaign. Harris, a 55-year-old first-term senator, is also one of the party’s most prominent figures and quickly became a top contender for the No. 2 spot after her own White House campaign ended.
Harris joins Biden in the 2020 race at a moment of unprecedented national crisis. The coronavirus pandemic has claimed the lives of more than 150,000 people in the US, far more than the toll experienced in other countries. Business closures and disruptions resulting from the pandemic have caused an economic collapse. Unrest, meanwhile, has emerged across the country as Americans protest racism and police brutality.
Trump’s uneven handling of the crises has given Biden an opening, and he enters the fall campaign in strong position against the president. In adding Harris to the ticket, he can point to her relatively centrist record on issues such as health care and her background in law enforcement in the nation’s largest state.
Harris’ record as California attorney general and district attorney in San Francisco was heavily scrutinized during the Democratic primary and turned off some liberals and younger Black voters who saw her as out of step on issues of systemic racism in the legal system and police brutality. She tried to strike a balance on these issues, declaring herself a “progressive prosecutor” who backs law enforcement reforms.
Biden, who spent eight years as President Barack Obama’s vice president, has spent months weighing who would fill that same role in his White House. He pledged in March to select a woman as his vice president, easing frustration among Democrats that the presidential race would center on two white men in their 70s.
Biden’s search was expansive, including Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a leading progressive, Florida Rep. Val Demings, whose impeachment prosecution of Trump won plaudits, California Rep. Karen Bass, who leads the Congressional Black Caucus, former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice and Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, whose passionate response to unrest in her city garnered national attention.
A woman has never served as president or vice president in the United States. Two women have been nominated as running mates on major party tickets: Democrat Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Republican Sarah Palin in 2008. Their party lost in the general election.
The vice presidential pick carries increased significance this year. If elected, Biden would be 78 when he’s inaugurated in January, the oldest man to ever assume the presidency. He’s spoken of himself as a transitional figure and hasn’t fully committed to seeking a second term in 2024. If he declines to do so, his running mate would likely become a front-runner for the nomination that year.
Born in Oakland to a Jamaican father and Indian mother, Harris won her first election in 2003 when she became San Francisco’s district attorney. In the role, she created a reentry program for low-level drug offenders and cracked down on student truancy.
She was elected California’s attorney general in 2010, the first woman and Black person to hold the job, and focused on issues including the foreclosure crisis. She declined to defend the state’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage and was later overturned by the US Supreme Court.
As her national profile grew, Harris built a reputation around her work as a prosecutor. After being elected to the Senate in 2016, she quickly gained attention for her assertive questioning of Trump administration officials during congressional hearings. In one memorable moment last year, Harris tripped up Attorney General William Barr when she repeatedly pressed him on whether Trump or other White House officials pressured him to investigate certain people.
Harris launched her presidential campaign in early 2019 with the slogan “Kamala Harris For the People,” a reference to her courtroom work. She was one of the highest-profile contenders in a crowded Democratic primary and attracted 20,000 people to her first campaign rally in Oakland.
But the early promise of her campaign eventually faded. Her law enforcement background prompted skepticism from some progressives, and she struggled to land on a consistent message that resonated with voters. Facing fundraising problems, Harris abruptly withdrew from the race in December 2019, two months before the first votes of the primary were cast.
One of Harris’ standout moments of her presidential campaign came at the expense of Biden. During a debate, Harris said Biden made “very hurtful” comments about his past work with segregationist senators and slammed his opposition to busing as schools began to integrate in the 1970s.
“There was a little girl in California who was a part of the second class to integrate her public schools, and she was bused to school every day,” she said. “And that little girl was me.”
Shaken by the attack, Biden called her comments “a mischaracterization of my position.”
The exchange resurfaced recently one of Biden’s closest friends and a co-chair of his vice presidential vetting committee, former Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, still harbors concerns about the debate and that Harris hadn’t expressed regret. The comments attributed to Dodd and first reported by Politico drew condemnation, especially from influential Democratic women who said Harris was being held to a standard that wouldn’t apply to a man running for president.
Some Biden confidants said Harris’ campaign attack did irritate the former vice president, who had a friendly relationship with her. Harris was also close with Biden’s late son, Beau, who served as Delaware attorney general while she held the same post in California.
But Biden and Harris have since returned to a warm relationship.
“Joe has empathy, he has a proven track record of leadership and more than ever before we need a president of the United States who understands who the people are, sees them where they are, and has a genuine desire to help and knows how to fight to get us where we need to be,” Harris said at an event for Biden earlier this summer.
At the same event, she bluntly attacked Trump, labeling him a “drug pusher” for his promotion of the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the coronavirus, which has not been proved to be an effective treatment and may even be more harmful. After Trump tweeted “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” in response to protests about the death of George Floyd, a Black man, in police custody, Harris said his remarks “yet again show what racism looks like.”
Harris has taken a tougher stand on policing since Floyd’s killing. She co-sponsored legislation in June that would ban police from using chokeholds and no-knock warrants, set a national use-of-force standard and create a national police misconduct registry, among other things. It would also reform the qualified immunity system that shields officers from liability.
The list included practices Harris did not vocally fight to reform while leading California’s Department of Justice. Although she required DOJ officers to wear body cameras, she did not support legislation mandating it statewide. And while she now wants independent investigations of police shootings, she didn’t support a 2015 California bill that would have required her office to take on such cases.
“We made progress, but clearly we are not at the place yet as a country where we need to be and California is no exception,” she told The Associated Press recently. But the national focus on racial injustice now shows “there’s no reason that we have to continue to wait.”