Five questions and answers about the arrest warrant against former President Álvaro Uribe in Colombia

Álvaro Uribe's arrest: keys to the case against him 2:27

(CNN Spanish) - Former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe has against him an arrest warrant for the Investigative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice for the alleged crimes of bribery and procedural fraud, in a case for alleged witness tampering. Uribe has always denied the charges.

These are some questions left by the case.

What is the case and what is Uribe accused of?

Former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez (2002-2006; 2006-2010) is accused of alleged witness tampering. The case dates back to 2014, when Senator Iván Cepeda, of the opposition Polo Democrático, denounced Uribe for his alleged links to paramilitarism, something that Uribe has constantly denied.

LOOK: Álvaro Uribe tested positive for covid-19

But Uribe decided to take the case to court and denounce Cepeda for the serious charges. He argued that the ex-paramilitary Juan Guillermo Monsalve - who is currently in prison convicted - and other witnesses, had been manipulated and pressured. Through his lawyers, Monsalve denied having received any type of legal or economic benefits from Cepeda for his statements.

• As loved as hated: former President Álvaro Uribe is a figure that divides Colombians

But the magistrates found enough elements to exonerate Cepeda, and instead decided to investigate Uribe after finding what they consider to be new evidence and testimonies that would involve the former president in the same practices of which he accused Senator Cepeda. Uribe's complaint against Cepeda was filed.

"After this file was released, it appears that, with the senator's approval, people close to him would have undertaken probable acts of witness tampering," the Supreme Court said in a statement this week.

In this case, Monsalve told Cepeda in an interview recorded by the senator in 2013 that a paramilitary group had formed on the "Guacharacas" estate, owned by the Uribe family. Monsalve's family worked on that hacienda and therefore, he claimed to know the facts firsthand.

Monsalve later retracted his statements against Uribe and said he did so under pressure from one of Uribe's lawyers. That lawyer, Diego Cadena, is a key part of the case, and acknowledged having made a payment to that paramilitary, as "humanitarian support" and not a bribe. And Uribe said he had no knowledge of these activities.

On August 4, the Supreme Court of Justice imposed an insurance measure against Uribe, for "possible risks of obstruction of justice, regarding the future collection of evidence of alleged criminal acts" involving Senator Uribe, says a statement from the Court . The high court says it has a large body of evidence that "appears to indicate his alleged involvement as a determiner of the crimes of witness bribery in criminal proceedings and procedural fraud."

Jaime Granados, the former president's lawyer, denied that Uribe had bribed Monsalve and instead asked that the "witness freely tell the truth."

"It cannot be understood in any context as a bribe, since President Uribe was never asked to give up the witness or to partially or totally silence the truth," Granados said in a statement on Wednesday.

What do Uribe, his political partners and followers say?

Former President Uribe regretted the Court's decision, saying that it "causes him deep sadness for my wife, for my family, and for the Colombians who still believe that I have done something good for the country."

The President of Colombia, Iván Duque, whose political godfather is former President Uribe, came to the defense of the senator, saying that for years "he faced drug trafficking, terrorism and totalitarian regimes in Latin America," he has respected justice and "a product of their struggle "have been the victims of" attacks and defamation ".

"I am and always will be a believer in the innocence and honor of someone who has earned a place in the history of Colombia through his example," said Duque. "As president, I call for reflection, I understand the role of institutions and the independence of powers. As a citizen and believer in institutions, I hope that the judicial channels will operate and that there are full guarantees for a full citizen to exercise his defense fully" .

The pro-government Centro Democrático party, created by Uribe, rejected in a statement the court's decision and said that Uribe faces "actions by sophisticated defamation structures, supported by false witnesses."

The Democratic Center proposed a National Constituent Assembly, "with the purpose of depoliticizing justice and recovering confidence in the institutions of the republic."

What do the opponents say?

Senator Iván Cepeda, one of the protagonists of this case, recalled that nobody is above the law.

"Today it was demonstrated that in a democratic society, law and justice are to control the arbitrariness of power," Cepeda tweeted.

"The Supreme Court of Justice has reminded us that there is a constitution, that there is a legal order and that in that legal order the judges of the republic have the possibility, the duty, to exercise justice," Cepeda said in an interview with a media outlet. local. "There are no people who are above justice and law, however powerful and influential they are."

Opposition senators supported the decision of the Court and made a call to respect the decisions of justice, regardless of the outcome.

Uribe's main opponent, senator and former presidential candidate Gustavo Petro said on Twitter that: "Whatever the development of that process, Colombia must respect its justice."

Former President Juan Manuel Santos —who was part of the Álvaro Uribe government as his defense minister, and his first candidacy for the Presidency was supported by Uribe, but they were antagonized by the peace process— said he hopes the former president “can solve his difficult situation "and, as a citizen, that justice give him" full guarantees and Colombians full respect for justice. "

What's next for Uribe?

Uribe's lawyer, Jaime Granados, said in a statement that he learned of the Court's decision through a press release. Granados told CNN en Español that he has not been formally notified by the court of this decision and that the former president awaits this notification at a hacienda located in northern Colombia. The defense of the senator and former president evaluate what measures they will take, whether to appeal the decision or wait for the second step, which surely can be a call to trial, where the evidence is expected to be controversial. According to the Court's statement, the evidence available to him is "testimonials, judicial inspections, film records, recordings and telephone interceptions, which apparently indicate his alleged participation as a determiner of the crimes" of which he is accused.

"It is a very delicate decision, very serious, but the investigation continues," said criminal lawyer Francisco Bernate, in an interview with Canal Institucional. Bernate adds that from now on the debate continues, the provision of evidence, until the Court determines whether to accuse Uribe or to close the case.

Will you lose your seat?

What happens in the process from now on will determine the political future of Uribe Vélez, but the Constitution of Colombia establishes in its article 134 that any public servant must be replaced in cases of "absolute or temporary absences." And detained at home, Senator Uribe will not be able to continue exercising his position, according to the constitutional lawyer Rodrigo Uprimny.

"Uribe is being investigated and is being detained for a crime against the administration of justice and not against the public administration," Uprimny told CNN en Español. "But he was arrested, which is a measure of deprivation of liberty. So, according to the transitory paragraph (of article 134), it is a temporary offense because he cannot remain a senator for now ».

However, adds the expert, "the Democratic Center can replace it because the crimes for which he was detained are not of those provided for the figure of the 'Empty Chair', or loss or suspension of the seat for the party, which is the second paragraph of that article ».

Meanwhile, Colombian law also establishes that when an assurance measure is imposed against a public servant, in the same order the respective authority will be asked to proceed to suspend the post. "While the suspension is in force, the necessary measures will be taken to prevent the accused from evading the action of justice," says Law 600 of 2000.

Álvaro Uribe Vélez