Óscar Atehortúa, date of the Attorney General’s ruling and keys to his case – Investigation – Justice

(Also read: The testimonies that entangle the Director of Police in the Attorney General’s Office)

The process has been awaiting a ruling for more than 6 months, since in April of last year the closing arguments of part and part had been read and, according to the Disciplinary Code that is currently in force, the judgments must be delivered within the 20 business days following the expiration of the transfer term to present closing arguments.

(You may be interested: ‘There is no plot against the Director of the Police’: General Salamanca)

In the first place, due to alleged irregularities in the CENOP tax houses project, in San Luis (Tolima), between 2014 and 2015, when Atehortúa was general director of the Police Revolving Fund.

(We recommend: Director of the Police, in disciplinary proceedings at the Attorney General’s Office)

Likewise, for apparent faults in the procedure that the officer gave them to disciplinary actions for these events, when he was in front of the General Inspection of the Police, in 2018.

Third, for alleged overreaching of duties as director of the Police, in 2019, by asking one of the captains of the General Inspectorate for confidential information from the internal investigation into that project of the prosecutorial houses.

Finally, for influence peddling in 2019, from the General Directorate of the Police, in relation to the episode in which it sent the general William René Salamanca, former Police Inspector.

(You may be interested: Hard testimony of General Salamanca in the Police Director’s trial)

General Óscar Atehortúa (in the image on the right) in one of the hearings of the disciplinary trial.

Currently, the regulations give a period of 20 business days following the expiration of the transfer for the closing arguments to deliver the ruling. In May 2021 those 20 days were completed from the reading of the closing arguments in the case of the former director of the Police, but there is still no decision.

(We suggest you read: The process that brought against two senior police generals)

The first date of the hearing to read the ruling had been cited on April 28, but had to be modified by the demonstrations that were scheduled that day – which was the beginning of the national strike.

Then it was scheduled for May 5, but it also had to be moved due to the protests, because the hearings in this process were being held in person at the premises of the Attorney General’s Office, which is in the center of Bogotá.

(More notes: I would like to have the most honest policemen, but we are human: General Atehortúa)

The diligence was rescheduled for May 11, but that date was also changed at the last minute, without the reason being publicly reported. Subsequently, the diligence was scheduled for May 31, but a day before the date was moved, according to the Attorney General’s Office, by the office’s agenda.

Article 33 of the General Disciplinary Code -Law 1952 of 2019- establishes that disciplinary action prescribes 5 years after the alleged offense has been committed; this versus what was established in the previous Single Disciplinary Code –Law 734 of 2002–, which says that they prescribe if after 5 years of the offense an investigation is not opened.

The reform -Law 2094 of 2021- promoted by Cabello saved the times for the case of Atehortúa, and about 10,000 more processes, because in force it established: “The provisions provided in this law, and those contained in the 1952 law of 2019, which are not subject to reform, will come into force 9 months after their promulgation. During this period, Law 734 of 2002, with its reforms, will remain in full force “.

This means that, at this time, the provision according to which the action prescribes is still in force if after 5 years of the fault an investigation is not opened.

In the case of the general, of the four charges for which he is in disciplinary proceedings, that of the alleged irregularities in the construction of the fiscal houses has a date before July 2016, which would have caused it to prescribe if it had not been extended. the time for the entry into force of the new regulations.

-With infamous case of abuse and forgetfulness, Court alerts for institutional violence

-Defense of ‘Otoniel’ denies escape plan and says it will ask the IACHR for measures

Leave a Comment