La sénatrice María Clara Posada répond à la défenseur du peuple qu'elle ne se rétractera pas pour avoir révélé les audiences de la JEP

Senadora Maria Clara Posada has refused a formal request from the Office of the Ombudsman to retract her public disclosures regarding reserved hearings of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, known as the JEP. In a letter sent to Ombudsman Iris Marin, Posada stated she would neither withdraw her statements nor halt her investigations into alleged irregularities within the special tribunal. The dispute centers on video clips released by the senator from private sessions involving former FARC commander Rodrigo Londoño, widely known as Timochenko, which Posada argues demonstrate inappropriate conduct by JEP judges toward former guerrillas compared to their treatment of victims. Marin, who served as an auxiliary magistrate at the JEP before assuming her current role, requested that both Posada and Senator German Rodriguez of the Salvation National party retract claims she described as false or unsupported. The Ombudsman accused the legislators of using fragmented excerpts from judicial proceedings to suggest a supposed closeness or complicity between Judge Julieta Lemaitre and former FARC members. Marin specifically criticized expressions used by the senators, such as claiming Lemaitre was romantically involved with Timochenko, labeling these remarks as gender-based attacks that shift the discussion from legal matters to personal stereotyping. The controversy emerged during debates over the national budget, where Congress approved a cut of 170 billion pesos to the JEP’s funding. Posada published a thirty-second clip from a 2019 hearing in which Timochenko discussed the treatment of kidnapped guerrilla fighters. During the session, staff entered to serve coffee, and Judge Lemaitre remarked that it was fortunate the woman responsible for serving drinks had not yet left. The room erupted in laughter. Posada shared the footage under the caption describing it as a six-hour chat with friends. The clip went viral and was presented by critics as proof of collusion between the tribunal and criminals. In her response to Marin, Posada rejected the notion that the Ombudsman could impose its interpretation of the facts. She argued that as a congresswoman, she represents citizen interests through political oversight and does not need permission to decide which facts to investigate or which expenses to question. Posada emphasized that the Colombian Constitution protects dissent and distinguished between correcting false information and abandoning critical judgment because it inconveniences officials. She maintained that the treatment observed toward leaders of an organization responsible for kidnappings and atrocities was improper, noting that no subsequent judicial decision erases that history or prevents comparison with how victims were treated. The Ombudsman’s office issued a statement rejecting what it termed a campaign of defamation and disinformation directed against Judge Lemaitre. It warned that such attacks, some containing gender violence, affect the judge’s reputation, integrity, and judicial autonomy. The entity noted that the accusations ignore the verifiable results of Lemaitre’s judicial work. According to the JEP, her chamber has issued nine indictments against seventy-four former FARC commanders for war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder, hostage-taking, torture, sexual violence, and forced disappearance. The JEP stated that no other chamber has indicted more commanders from the guerrilla group. Furthermore, the Ombudsman highlighted achievements in Case 01, which focused on kidnapping. The Peace Court convicted members of the former FARC Secretariat for kidnapping and thirteen other crimes committed during captivity. The Appeals Section confirmed this sentence with the maximum penalty allowed by law. The JEP noted this is the first time the Secretariat has faced a conviction in the country. Of sixty-three individuals indicted as top responsible parties in Case 01, only twenty-three had been processed by ordinary justice, and only thirteen had been imprisoned. Additionally, the indictment against the Western Block for the kidnapping of Valle department deputies identified for the first time those who led its surveillance operations. Posada also questioned why Marin acted with such speed to defend the JEP while remaining silent on issues concerning military personnel who have not accepted responsibility for facts investigated by the tribunal. She pointed out that the Ombudsman had not condemned the fact that the FARC failed to deliver eighty-one point eight percent of real estate and ninety-six point five percent of movable assets they committed to providing for victim repair. Posada further criticized the outsourcing arrangement made with the United Nations Development Programme to execute projects worth 201.467 billion pesos, alleging total opacity in the process. The Ombudsman acknowledged that JEP actions can be subject to questioning and reform through appropriate institutional mechanisms. However, it stressed that defending judicial independence does not mean preventing reforms, but ensuring they are debated with arguments, verifiable information, and respect for the rule of law, victims' rights, and the separation of powers. The office reminded politicians of their special responsibility regarding the rigor of information they disseminate. It warned that digital violence has consequences beyond social media, potentially affecting the security, personal life, and professional exercise of women holding public office. As part of the ten-year anniversary of the signing of the Final Peace Agreement, the Ombudsman invited Congress, the Government, the Jurisdiction, victims, and society to promote a pluralistic and constructive debate. This debate should focus on the efficacy of procedures, the imposition of restorative sanctions, and the strengthening of reparation efforts. The Ombudsman concluded its position by requesting that the involved congressmen refrain from reproducing decontextualized content or expressions that promote stigmatization and gender violence. Posada stood by her assessment of the images disclosed, asserting that her criticism remains valid despite the official requests for correction.