Ex-Colombian President Álvaro Uribe given 12 years of house arrest
Aug. 1 (UPI) -- Former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez was sentenced Friday to 12 years of house arrest for bribery in criminal proceedings and procedural fraud.
Uribe also was ordered to pay a fine equivalent to $820,000 and was barred from holding public office for more than eight years.
Judge Sandra Liliana Heredia found Uribe guilty Thursday of those crimes and issued a historic ruling against him, making him the first former Colombian president to be criminally convicted in the country's modern judicial history.
The ruling has polarized the country. While Uribe's supporters denounce it as "political persecution," many victims of human rights violations say it finally sets a precedent for justice.
Related Former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe found guilty of bribery and fraud
Uribe's legal team is to have Bogotá Superior Court consider an appeal Aug. 11, leaving uncertainty over whether the sentence will be enforced or suspended while the appeal process proceeds.
The case began in 2012, when then-Sen. Álvaro Uribe filed a complaint against Sen. Iván Cepeda Castro, accusing him of witness tampering in an effort to link Uribe to illegal armed groups. But the investigation soon took an unexpected turn.
The Supreme Court of Justice, which initially investigated Cepeda, found evidence that individuals close to Uribe had offered financial, legal and administrative benefits to former paramilitaries and guerrilla fighters in exchange for testimony against Cepeda.
Uribe was then charged with manipulating evidence and misleading the justice system to influence judges and secure rulings favorable to his interests -- in the very investigation he had initiated against Cepeda.
After the sentencing, Historical Pact Sen. Wilson Arias said. "Twelve years in prison for Álvaro Uribe-- and no, this is not political persecution. No one reported him: he initiated a vendetta against Iván Cepeda and, along the way, committed the crimes of witness tampering and procedural fraud," the Colombian newspaper El Mundo reported.
On her X account, Rep. Alexandra Vásquez wrote that "justice has spoken and stood above economic and political power."
Former President Iván Duque released a video in which he claimed that a group of 28 former presidents from IDEA and Libertad y Democracia have called for international oversight due to serious irregularities in the case against Álvaro Uribe Vélez.
"Human rights treaties were violated, and there is not a single piece of evidence to justify a conviction. Uribe is innocent," he said.
Christian Garcés Aljure, a member of Colombia's House of Representatives, wrote on X: "They want to silence our top leader -- the man holding back the socialist advance in South America. They will not defeat us!"
During his presidency, Uribe implemented a policy known as "Democratic Security," which reduced kidnapping and homicide rates and supported the demobilization of paramilitary and guerrilla forces.
However, Uribe also faced sharp criticism over alleged human rights violations and the demobilization of paramilitary groups with impunity. His presidency was further overshadowed by the "false positives" scandal, in which thousands of civilians were killed by the military and falsely labeled as guerrilla fighters killed in combat.
According to the investigation, between 2012 and 2018, imprisoned paramilitaries were paid and pressured to change their testimony linking Uribe to illegal armed groups.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
22 minutes ago
- Forbes
Repeal Of The Endangerment Finding Could Shred U.S. Climate Progress
Amid political drama, a quieter but more consequential move is underway: Donald Trump wants to repeal the EPA's Endangerment Finding — the legal cornerstone of federal climate action. The Finding, issued in 2009, legally obligates the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. Yet, this is one of Trump's most radical—and legally risky—climate moves to date. Politically, it signals that climate denial has shifted from questioning science and dissing carbon-free solutions to disabling the government's ability to act on it. This move would undermine the legal basis for nearly every federal climate initiative since 2009. If it succeeds, it could eliminate the federal government's duty to combat climate pollution. The result? It would weaken emissions standards across transportation, power, and industry, exposing Americans to greater health and financial risks from unchecked warming. 'Without the Endangerment Finding, there's no legal reason for EPA to act on climate,' said Jody Freeman, Harvard law professor and former climate adviser under President Obama. 'This isn't just another deregulatory move—it's foundational.' Air pollution from fossil fuels is linked to 1 in 5 global deaths, according to a 2021 Harvard study. When the EPA issued the Endangerment Finding in 2009, it identified six greenhouse gases—particularly carbon dioxide and methane—that threatened human health and welfare. Hence, EPA's regulatory reach extended. It covers power plants, vehicle emission standards, and permitting rules for large industrial facilities. The Finding followed the Supreme Court's 2007 ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which determined that greenhouse gases are 'air pollutants' under the Clean Air Act. Consequently, EPA cannot simply ignore them if they threaten public health. Because the 2009 Finding is based on scientific evidence, repealing it would require new data, a complete administrative process, and likely court review. Greenhouse gas regulation brings well-documented public health co-benefits, including reductions in particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. According to EPA estimates, past rules tied to greenhouse gas limits have saved between 12,000 and 15,000 American lives annually due to improved air quality. A Keystone In U.S. Climate Law Meanwhile, the economic cost of inaction is soaring. NOAA reports that U.S. climate disasters caused $95 billion in damages in 2023 alone. The National Climate Assessment warns that climate-driven economic losses could exceed $2 trillion by 2100 if emissions continue unchecked. 'The agency ignored the benefits of greenhouse gas reductions altogether, pretending they don't exist. EPA's analysis merely shows—tautologically—that if one ignores the benefits of regulation, regulation has only costs,' said Richard Revesz, professor and dean emeritus at the New York University School of Law, in a Slate column. Legally, repealing the Endangerment Finding is a minefield. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, EPA must offer new scientific reasoning to justify reversal—an argument almost no peer-reviewed science supports. A 2021 review in Environmental Research Letters found 99.9% of climate science papers attribute warming to human activity. The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in West Virginia v. EPA limited EPA's ability to enforce broad climate rules through the 'major questions' doctrine. However, it did not affect the Endangerment Finding itself. Courts have consistently declined to question the underlying science. Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown law professor and former EPA attorney, told Environmental Law Reporter that repeal efforts would be met with intense opposition and run counter to decades of environmental jurisprudence. 'The Clean Air Act requires EPA to study pollutants, assess their danger, and set standards'—full stop, she said. Trump's rollback fits a larger trend. His administration has left the Paris Agreement and is working to undo at least 30 environmental regulations while loosening caps on power plant emissions—actions that appeal to fossil fuel donors and ideological groups like the Heritage Foundation, which pushed for repeal in its 'Project 2025' plan. However, these steps clash with the direction of the business community. According to Climate Impact Partners' 2024 report on the Fortune Global 500, 45% of companies have net-zero goals by 2050. That's up from 39% in 2023 and considerably greater than the 8% in 2020. Legal Chaos Meets Business Reality To that end, most major U.S. companies have climate targets and disclosure rules. Microsoft aims to be carbon-negative by 2030. GM plans to phase out internal combustion vehicles by 2035. Even ExxonMobil has pledged net-zero Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2050. 'For nearly two decades, businesses across the U.S. have directed investment and charted long-term plans based on the widespread understanding that the EPA can and should set rules to address climate pollution,' said Anne Kelly, vice president of government relations, Ceres. 'Any move to undo this vital policy foundation would send shockwaves throughout the economy.' Policy volatility threatens the infrastructure, energy, and manufacturing sectors—particularly companies like NextEra Energy, Cummins, and Siemens USA that depend on clear climate regulations for capital planning. Investor coalitions and global regulators, especially in Europe, are monitoring the situation closely. A repeal would indicate that U.S. climate policy is politically fragile, making it more difficult for any business to plan, invest, or lead internationally. There is no new scientific consensus challenging the 2009 Finding. Instead, some officials may try to redefine EPA authority by arguing it can now ignore pollutants it once deemed dangerous—a line of reasoning that the U.S. Supreme Court already rejected in 2007. However, it remains a key part of the current administration's stance—presented with more polished messaging. It's simply the rebranding of climate denialism. While the repeal might resonate in parts of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, it won't bring coal back. Market forces—not regulation—have driven coal's decline. U.S. coal generation has dropped by more than 50% since 2007. Utilities are shifting to cheaper, cleaner options regardless of federal policy. Groups like Reimagine Appalachia argue that real regional revitalization comes not from reversing environmental progress, but from clean manufacturing, broadband, and job retraining. 'Ignoring the problems caused by greenhouse gas emissions will not make them go away,' the group said. Even if the repeal fails in court—or drags on—it could still cause years of legal uncertainty, chilling innovation and enforcement. At a time when billion-dollar wildfires and record heat waves are rising, the message from Washington isn't climate readiness. It's a return to the 1950s. The science may be overwhelming. But don't underestimate how much industrial power and political ambitions can undercut progress.
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Tensions escalate as Sudan downs Emirati plane carrying mercenaries, weapons for rivals
Tensions between Sudan and the United Arab Emirates have intensified following reports that the Sudanese air force shot down an Emirati aircraft allegedly transporting mercenaries and military equipment destined for the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The Sudanese Air Force reportedly downed an Emirati aircraft suspected of transporting mercenaries and equipment for paramilitary forces. The incident, occurring at Nyala Airport in South Darfur, escalates already tense relations between Sudan and the UAE. This dispute underscores the worsening dynamics between the countries amidst Sudan's ongoing conflict. The incident, which took place at Nyala airport in South Darfur, a region controlled largely by the RSF marks a dramatic escalation in the already f raught relationship between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi. According to state-run television aligned with the army, the Sudanese air force launched a surprise airstrike on the runway of Nyala International Airport in South Darfur early Wednesday. The report, citing military sources, said the strike targeted a group of Colombian mercenaries arriving aboard a private aircraft believed to have taken off from a Gulf airbase. The airstrike destroyed the plane and killed at least 40 people, identified by Sudanese authorities as foreign fighters. The Sudanese army, led by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, has long accused the UAE of funnelling arms and personnel into Sudan through Nyala airport. Tensions peaked in May when Sudan's Security and Defence Council announced the severing of diplomatic ties with the UAE, formally declaring it a 'state of aggression.' These claims have been echoed in reports by UN experts, U.S. officials, and international organisations, though the UAE has repeatedly denied any involvement. More diplomatic fallout as UAE bars Sudanese carriers Tensions between the United Arab Emirates and Sudan further escalated following an announcement by Sudan's Civil Aviation Authority that Emirati authorities have banned all Sudanese aircraft from landing at UAE airports. The agency also reported that a Sudanese airliner was recently barred from taking off from Abu Dhabi, signalling a sharp deterioration in aviation ties between the two countries. According to the Sudan Tribune, staff at Sudanese carriers Badr and Tarco said UAE civil aviation authorities had blocked their flights to and from Dubai and Sharjah without providing any explanation. The abrupt decision, issued after passengers on a Tarco flight had already completed departure formalities, caused confusion and disruption at Port Sudan airport. The Sudanese government has expressed surprise at the move and said it is working with airlines to reprogramme flight schedules for passengers travelling to and from the Gulf country.
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Australian woman wrongfully jailed for killing her children gets $1.3M
Kathleen Folbigg (C) flanked by her counsel, Rhanee Rego (L), and friend Tracy Chapman (R), walks from the New South Wales Criminal Appeal Court in Sydney a free woman in December 2023 after having convictions for killing her four children formally quashed. File photo by Dan Himbrechts/EPA-EFE Aug. 7 (UPI) -- Lawyers for an Australian Kathleen Folbigg, who spent two decades in prison after being wrongfully convicted of killing her four children as infants, have dismissed a $1.3 million compensation offer from the government as "woefully inadequate." Folbigg's lawyer, Rhanee Rego called the payout -- which was only around a fifth of the $6.5 million or more that experts had expected the 58-year-old to receive -- "profoundly unfair and unjust" and demanded an independent review of the decision. "The sum offered is a moral affront -- woefully inadequate and ethically indefensible. The system has failed Kathleen Folbigg once again," Rego said in a statement. New South Wales Attorney General Michael Daley said the decision -- which came 19 months after she was acquitted of the murder of Patrick, Sarah and Laura and the manslaughter of Caleb -- was the result of "thorough and extensive" review of Folbigg's compensation claim. He declined to discuss the sums involved as he said he did not have authority from Folbigg to do so. Folbigg was sentenced to 40 years, later reduced to 30 years on appeal, for killing the children between 1989 and 1999, but her conviction, largely on circumstantial evidence, was quashed in December 2023 after a special commission of inquiry brought forward new science showing the children died of natural causes. Rego said the ordeal had left Folbigg, who was for years portrayed as Australia's worst serial killer, traumatized with an ongoing impact that continued to affect her. Calling it one of the most egregious miscarriages of justice in Australia, Rego said the compensation offer failed to "reflect the extent of the pain and suffering Kathleen has endured." "An inquiry is needed to understand how the government decided on this figure." Rego compared Folbigg's position to that of Lindy Chamberlain who was wrongly convicted and sentenced to life for killing her baby daughter after claiming the infant had been taken by a dingo during a camping trip in the outback. After being acquitted of murder by the Supreme Court in 1988, Chamberlain subsequently received $1.1 million for the three years she was wrongfully imprisoned. "Kathleen Folbigg spent two decades in prison, yet for her wrongful imprisonment she has been offered $1.3 million," said Rego. Tracy Chapman, friend and spokesperson for Folbigg, said the money would barely cover her expenses after decades of incarceration and she was left speechless by the offer. "She [Folbigg] literally said, 'I have no words,'" Chapman said. "She's been in prison for twenty years and you're asking her to live off that amount of money with bills, and the ongoing costs, it's not enough. She's going to need mental health support for the rest of her days." After Folbigg was released in 2023, forensic criminologist Xanthe Mallett said she expected a payout of more than $6.5 million, while University of New South Wales Professor Gary Edmond said the compensation awarded "would have to be" the highest in the country's history.
