The repairs of the prosecutor to the Constitutional Court by the GEP



In a letter addressed to the President of the Constitutional Court, Alejandro Linares Castillo, Prosecutor General Néstor Humberto Martínez expressed his concern over the most recent decisions of the High Court on the special jurisdiction of peace, GEP.

This in connection with the framework of preliminary checks on the constitutionality of the draft law of the JEP.

There are a total of five points on which the accusing body raises objections and questions:

1. Drug trafficking as a crime of permanent execution

With regard to the competence to take note of drug trafficking as a crime of permanent enforcement, the prosecutor confirms that the peace agreement between the government and the FARC, has not defined a competent jurisdiction to hear crimes of permanent execution.

For this reason the accusing body suggested that these crimes were known to the ordinary jurisdiction (prosecutor) and thus, according to the prosecutor, Act 01 of 2017, the legislator determined that the crimes related to drug trafficking, whose commissions started with before 1 December 2016, would be known to the ordinary courts.

"However, said standard was declared unconstitutionalas reported in the press release in his seventeenth paragraph, "confirms the prosecutor's general prosecutor's office, which even suggests that the press release of the Court might be a" mistake ", and asks that if this is not the case," the legislative act of the JEP and his constitutional interpretation, with the aggravating the fact that it would be impossible in practice to prosecute the reassor Continue to hold narco-cultures, store narcotics or illegally assign property for drug trafficking, in the absence of the competent authority to hear urgent acts of detection, search, seizure and imprisonment, because in such events the prosecution would be unauthorized until the GE decides, case by case, if granted to the ordinary jurisdiction. "

You can read: JEP already has tools, but some leave doubts

2. Investigation against government agents and re-inserted

The second interrogation of the Public Prosecution Service is related to the suspension of investigations against government agents and is being reinstated, and on this point Public Prosecutor Néstor Humberto Martínez confirms that in the Court's communiqué, although it is acknowledged that the Public Prosecution Service can continue with ongoing research, "in its interpretation leaves the research activity completely disabledby providing that they can not order the summons to conduct legal proceedings. "

Here, as in the matter of drug trafficking, the fear of the Public Prosecution Service is that some judicial operators may conclude this Because of what the Court said in the communiqué, it would not be possible to quote the relocation and agents of the state on interviews, questions, imputation formulation hearings, among others.

"All this, while the JEP takes on the competence of those matters, in a period that is expected to last for up to three years", the research body adds.

3. Abolition of the criminal investigation into serious crimes

Faced with the rejection of the criminal investigation into serious crimes, the prosecutor remembers that the Congress In the bill he stated that "in no case may the criminal action be dispensed with in the case of non-amnestable crimes ", however, the Attorney General says in the letter that" apparently the The Constitutional Court would have conditioned this provision".

And he asks a few questions: is it possible to refrain from criminal action when it comes to war crimes that have not been systematically committed? Could it be interpreted that with the mere judgment of the responsible persons, the other agents of the conflict who do not have such a status, such as the material executors of these crimes, are exempt from criminal liability, in which case the subsidiary power of the court could be activated? International Criminal for the mentioned topics?

4. Warranty of non-repetition

Associated with this the prosecutor's office confirms that although it had been agreed that in the case of recidivism in committing crimes by the JPG's postulates, all benefits would be lost, but now in the press release of the Court, "It looks like the expression & # 39; everything & # 39; ignores the principles of equality and proportionality of the conditionality principle. And that is why it declared its unconstitutionality. & # 39;

In this sense, the Attorney General asks to "clarify" whether a beneficiary of the system committing new crimes can continue to receive the rights, benefits, special treatments and guarantees from the JEP.

5. Extradition procedure

Finally, the prosecutor's office also warns against the extradition process, because after what the Constitutional Court said in his communiqué, the accusatory body he is concerned that Colombia may be removed from the possibility of materializing red circulars of the Interpolin the context of the global fight against crime; this extradition prevents the State from investigating renditions of extradited persons; that the possibility is opened for authorities other than the Prosecutor General to have the freedom of the prisoner for extradition purposes.


Source link

The repairs of the prosecutor to the Constitutional Court by the GEP



In a letter addressed to the President of the Constitutional Court, Alejandro Linares Castillo, Prosecutor General Néstor Humberto Martínez expressed his concern over the most recent decisions of the High Court on the special jurisdiction of peace, GEP.

This in connection with the framework of preliminary checks on the constitutionality of the draft law of the JEP.

There are a total of five points on which the accusing body raises objections and questions:

1. Drug trafficking as a crime of permanent execution

With regard to the competence to take note of drug trafficking as a crime of permanent enforcement, the prosecutor confirms that the peace agreement between the government and the FARC, has not defined a competent jurisdiction to hear crimes of permanent execution.

For this reason the accusing body suggested that these crimes were known to the ordinary jurisdiction (prosecutor) and thus, according to the prosecutor, Act 01 of 2017, the legislator determined that the crimes related to drug trafficking, whose commissions started with before 1 December 2016, would be known to the ordinary courts.

"However, said standard was declared unconstitutionalas reported in the press release in his seventeenth paragraph, "confirms the prosecutor's general prosecutor's office, which even suggests that the press release of the Court might be a" mistake ", and asks that if this is not the case," the legislative act of the JEP and his constitutional interpretation, with the aggravating the fact that it would be impossible in practice to prosecute the reassor Continue to hold narco-cultures, store narcotics or illegally assign property for drug trafficking, in the absence of the competent authority to hear urgent acts of detection, search, seizure and imprisonment, because in such events the prosecution would be unauthorized until the GE decides, case by case, if granted to the ordinary jurisdiction. "

You can read: JEP already has tools, but some leave doubts

2. Investigation against government agents and re-inserted

The second interrogation of the Public Prosecution Service is related to the suspension of investigations against government agents and is being reinstated, and on this point Public Prosecutor Néstor Humberto Martínez confirms that in the Court's communiqué, although it is acknowledged that the Public Prosecution Service can continue with ongoing research, "in its interpretation leaves the research activity completely disabledby providing that they can not order the summons to conduct legal proceedings. "

Here, as in the matter of drug trafficking, the fear of the Public Prosecution Service is that some judicial operators may conclude this Because of what the Court said in the communiqué, it would not be possible to quote the relocation and agents of the state on interviews, questions, imputation formulation hearings, among others.

"All this, while the JEP takes on the competence of those matters, in a period that is expected to last for up to three years", the research body adds.

3. Abolition of the criminal investigation into serious crimes

Faced with the rejection of the criminal investigation into serious crimes, the prosecutor remembers that the Congress In the bill he stated that "in no case may the criminal action be dispensed with in the case of non-amnestable crimes ", however, the Attorney General says in the letter that" apparently the The Constitutional Court would have conditioned this provision".

And he asks a few questions: is it possible to refrain from criminal action when it comes to war crimes that have not been systematically committed? Could it be interpreted that with the mere judgment of the responsible persons, the other agents of the conflict who do not have such a status, such as the material executors of these crimes, are exempt from criminal liability, in which case the subsidiary power of the court could be activated? International Criminal for the mentioned topics?

4. Warranty of non-repetition

Associated with this the prosecutor's office confirms that although it had been agreed that in the case of recidivism in committing crimes by the JPG's postulates, all benefits would be lost, but now in the press release of the Court, "It looks like the expression & # 39; everything & # 39; ignores the principles of equality and proportionality of the conditionality principle. And that is why it declared its unconstitutionality. & # 39;

In this sense, the Attorney General asks to "clarify" whether a beneficiary of the system committing new crimes can continue to receive the rights, benefits, special treatments and guarantees from the JEP.

5. Extradition procedure

Finally, the prosecutor's office also warns against the extradition process, because after what the Constitutional Court said in his communiqué, the accusatory body he is concerned that Colombia may be removed from the possibility of materializing red circulars of the Interpolin the context of the global fight against crime; this extradition prevents the State from investigating renditions of extradited persons; that the possibility is opened for authorities other than the Prosecutor General to have the freedom of the prisoner for extradition purposes.


Source link

The repairs of the prosecutor to the Constitutional Court by the GEP



In a letter addressed to the President of the Constitutional Court, Alejandro Linares Castillo, Prosecutor General Néstor Humberto Martínez expressed his concern over the most recent decisions of the High Court on the special jurisdiction of peace, GEP.

This in connection with the framework of preliminary checks on the constitutionality of the draft law of the JEP.

There are a total of five points on which the accusing body raises objections and questions:

1. Drug trafficking as a crime of permanent execution

With regard to the competence to take note of drug trafficking as a crime of permanent enforcement, the prosecutor confirms that the peace agreement between the government and the FARC, has not defined a competent jurisdiction to hear crimes of permanent execution.

For this reason the accusing body suggested that these crimes were known to the ordinary jurisdiction (prosecutor) and thus, according to the prosecutor, Act 01 of 2017, the legislator determined that the crimes related to drug trafficking, whose commissions started with before 1 December 2016, would be known to the ordinary courts.

"However, said standard was declared unconstitutionalas reported in the press release in his seventeenth paragraph, "confirms the prosecutor's general prosecutor's office, which even suggests that the press release of the Court might be a" mistake ", and asks that if this is not the case," the legislative act of the JEP and his constitutional interpretation, with the aggravating the fact that it would be impossible in practice to prosecute the reassor Continue to hold narco-cultures, store narcotics or illegally assign property for drug trafficking, in the absence of the competent authority to hear urgent acts of detection, search, seizure and imprisonment, because in such events the prosecution would be unauthorized until the GE decides, case by case, if granted to the ordinary jurisdiction. "

You can read: JEP already has tools, but some leave doubts

2. Investigation against government agents and re-inserted

The second interrogation of the Public Prosecution Service is related to the suspension of investigations against government agents and is being reinstated, and on this point Public Prosecutor Néstor Humberto Martínez confirms that in the Court's communiqué, although it is acknowledged that the Public Prosecution Service can continue with ongoing research, "in its interpretation leaves the research activity completely disabledby providing that they can not order the summons to conduct legal proceedings. "

Here, as in the matter of drug trafficking, the fear of the Public Prosecution Service is that some judicial operators may conclude this Because of what the Court said in the communiqué, it would not be possible to quote the relocation and agents of the state on interviews, questions, imputation formulation hearings, among others.

"All this, while the JEP takes on the competence of those matters, in a period that is expected to last for up to three years", the research body adds.

3. Abolition of the criminal investigation into serious crimes

Faced with the rejection of the criminal investigation into serious crimes, the prosecutor remembers that the Congress In the bill he stated that "in no case may the criminal action be dispensed with in the case of non-amnestable crimes ", however, the Attorney General says in the letter that" apparently the The Constitutional Court would have conditioned this provision".

And he asks a few questions: is it possible to refrain from criminal action when it comes to war crimes that have not been systematically committed? Could it be interpreted that with the mere judgment of the responsible persons, the other agents of the conflict who do not have such a status, such as the material executors of these crimes, are exempt from criminal liability, in which case the subsidiary power of the court could be activated? International Criminal for the mentioned topics?

4. Warranty of non-repetition

Associated with this the prosecutor's office confirms that although it had been agreed that in the case of recidivism in committing crimes by the JPG's postulates, all benefits would be lost, but now in the press release of the Court, "It looks like the expression & # 39; everything & # 39; ignores the principles of equality and proportionality of the conditionality principle. And that is why it declared its unconstitutionality. & # 39;

In this sense, the Attorney General asks to "clarify" whether a beneficiary of the system committing new crimes can continue to receive the rights, benefits, special treatments and guarantees from the JEP.

5. Extradition procedure

Finally, the prosecutor's office also warns against the extradition process, because after what the Constitutional Court said in his communiqué, the accusatory body he is concerned that Colombia may be removed from the possibility of materializing red circulars of the Interpolin the context of the global fight against crime; this extradition prevents the State from investigating renditions of extradited persons; that the possibility is opened for authorities other than the Prosecutor General to have the freedom of the prisoner for extradition purposes.


Source link

Leave a Reply