Colombia's former president Álvaro Uribe found guilty of witness tampering
The 73-year-old, who served as president from 2002 to 2010, was convicted on Monday of trying to persuade witnesses to lie for him in a separate investigation. He faces a 12-year prison sentence in a case that has become highly politicised.
The case dates back to 2012, when Uribe accused the leftwing senator Iván Cepeda before the supreme court of hatching a plot to falsely link him to rightwing paramilitary groups involved in Colombia's long-standing conflict.
The court decided against prosecuting Cepeda and pursued his claims against Uribe. As the judge started reading her verdict, Uribe – who attended the trial virtually – sat shaking his head. He is Colombia's first-ever former head of state to be convicted of a crime.
Paramilitary groups in Colombia emerged in the 1980s to fight Marxist guerrillas that had taken up arms against the state two decades earlier with the stated goal of combating poverty and political marginalisation, especially in rural areas.
Many armed groups adopted cocaine trafficking as their main source of income, the genesis of a deadly rivalry for resources and smuggling routes that continues to this day.
Uribe was a politician on the right of the political spectrum – like all Colombian presidents before the current leader, Gustavo Petro, who unseated Uribe's Democratic Centre party in 2022 elections.
During his tenure, Uribe led a relentless military campaign against drug cartels and the Farc guerrilla army, which signed a peace deal with his successor, Juan Manuel Santos, in 2016.
After Cepeda accused him of having had ties to paramilitary groups responsible for human rights violations, Uribe is alleged to have contacted jailed ex-fighters to lie for him. He claims he only wanted to convince them to tell the truth.
More than 90 witnesses testified in the trial, which began in May 2024. Prosecutors produced evidence during the trial of least one paramilitary ex-fighter who said he was contacted by Uribe to change his story.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
28 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The View co-host blasts Kamala Harris as 'microcosm of everything that's wrong' with Democratic Party
Kamala Harris was hit with a scathing rebuke from a co-host of one of television's most prominent daytime shows. The View co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin torched the former Vice President's recent late night interview as emblematic of the Democratic Party 's failure to learn from its 2024 defeat. 'This interview felt like a microcosm of everything that's wrong with Democrats post-election,' Griffin declared Saturday on CNN, referencing Harris's sit-down with Stephen Colbert to promote her new book. 'It's like announcing your exploratory committee on the sinking deck of the Titanic.' Griffin, a former Trump administration official who crossed party lines to vote for Harris in 2024, didn't hold back as she dismantled the Vice President's comeback strategy. She slammed the party's messaging on democracy, and accused Democrats of being tone-deaf to the voters they've lost. Griffin described Harris Colbert interview as a political misfire - and the perfect metaphor for the party's ongoing collapse. Harris, who has kept a low profile since her crushing loss in the 2024 election, reemerged in a sit-down interview to promote her upcoming book 107 Days, documenting what she called 'the shortest presidential campaign in modern history.' But the decision to appear on CBS, the very network that just canceled Colbert's show, seemed to raise more eyebrows than applause. 'I was struck by… I'm going to try not to be too harsh on this,' Griffin started. 'I'm going to CBS and this sort of trying to make a point that they fired Stephen Colbert, which many on the left called an attack on democracy - a man who was making $20 million a year, someone I hold in high esteem - but the economics of his show were not working.' CBS announced in July that it was ending The Late Show next May citing financial losses. But Colbert's allies on the left allege his firing was politically motivated, coming just days after he criticized CBS parent company Paramount for its legal settlement with Donald Trump. But Griffin wasn't buying the narrative. 'If everyone who was advising her told her this was a good idea… that is not where I would have made the grand comeback,' she said. 'He was losing $40 million a year. He was in the Ed Sullivan Theater, which is expensive, to talk about the plight of democracy at CBS, a network that's having its own struggles right now, rather than talking about the economics of the situation, and playing to something - a shrinking audience that is network television, not realizing it's not where the American voters are.' During Thursday night's interview Harris suggested that she had no current plans to run for governor of California. 'Recently, I made the decision that I just - for now, I don't want to go back in the system. I think it's broken.' CNN data analyst Harry Enten did not believe the reason Kamala Harris gave when she suggested she had no current plans to run for governor of California But CNN data analyst Harry Enten called foul. 'Oh, please. Not a chance on God's green earth that that's necessarily the case,' Enten said, adding that Harris is 'looking at the numbers' and seeing just how grim they are. 'She would be the weakest front-runner since 1992.' Griffin echoed such skepticism saying Harris' comments about democracy and the 'broken system' reeked of desperation. 'I think she genuinely believes what she's saying about the threats to democracy — I had, I raised concerns ahead of the election, some of which I share with her. But I also think that Democrats can go too far in these concerns,' Griffin said. 'Every time I hear something like Stephen Colbert losing his job as a threat to democracy, that makes people just roll their eyes.' Griffin's critique didn't stop there. She hammered Democrats for failing to adapt to the new political climate, saying Harris' rhetoric ignores why Donald Trump's message still resonates with millions. 'Donald Trump did talk about abolishing the Department of Education. He was open about what he was going to do. And the fact that Democrats couldn't listen to the American public and think, "Okay, something he's saying is resonating. What can we do to beat him?" - that's where I kind of, they lose it for me.' Harris' new book, 107 Days, set for release in September, is expected to detail her short-lived presidential run and offer lessons learned. In a video posted to social media, Harris framed the memoir as a path forward. 'I believe there's value in sharing what I saw, what I learned, and what I know it will take to move forward,' she said.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Why is Donald Trump discussing Sydney Sweeney and American Eagle
President Donald Trump is praising Sydney Sweeney in the wake of backlash against the American actress for her controversial American Eagle advertisement. "Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the HOTTEST ad out there," he wrote in a Truth Social post. "Go get 'em Sydney!"The Emmy-nominated actress for roles in Euphoria and The White Lotus stars in a denim jeans advertisement, where she states: "Genes are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair colour, personality and even eye colour. My jeans are blue." Critics have called out the blonde, blue-haired actress's wordplay in the commercial, using "genes" instead of "jeans" - sparking debate over race and western beauty Eagle has defended the advert and stated it was - and still is - only about the company's jeans. What is the controversy? The clothing store American Eagle released a jeans advertisement featuring Sweeney on 23 July. The slogan "Sydney Sweeney has great jeans" appeared on television, social media and on the outside of storefronts. Almost instantly, it received pushback from people on social criticised the "genes" pun coming from a blonde-haired, blue-eyed actress as echoing rhetoric associated with eugenics - the controlled selective reproduction of humans to improve future generations. Conservatives backed Sweeney and labelled the outrage as overblown and "woke". Reports then surfaced that Sweeney is a registered Republican. Shortly after, Trump made comments about the saga and expressed his support for her. Sweeney, herself, has not commented on the matter. What has American Eagle said? American Eagle has responded to the controversy and said the ad campaign "is and always was about the jeans". "Her jeans. Her story," American Eagle said. "We'll continue to celebrate how everyone wears their AE jeans with confidence, their way. Great jeans look good on everyone."Since Trump began speaking about the advertisement on Monday, the company's stock has skyrocketed, and was up as much as 20%. That did not surprise, Allen Adamson, co-founder of marketing consultancy Metaforce, who said American Eagle "nailed" the advertisement."It is exponentially harder than it was years ago," he told the BBC. "Success in marketing today is to get consumers sharing [advertisements] on social."But advertisements have to be "extraordinary" for people to share them, "whether that's extraordinary good or extraordinarily bad," he Adamson said the social media buzz American Eagle is getting from the advertisement is worth ten or 20 times what the store spent on creating it. Is Sweeney a Republican? Sweeney has been registered as a Republican in the state of Florida since 2024, records show. But she has not spoken out about politics. She made headlines in 2023 when videos and images from her mother's birthday party were shared online and showed some attendees in Make America Great Again hats. Sweeney responded and said people should "stop making assumptions" and turning the "innocent celebration" into an "absurd political statement."Months later, she was asked about it in an interview: "Honestly, I feel like nothing I say can help the conversation," she told GQ. "It's been turning into a wildfire, and nothing I can say will take it back to the correct track," she added. What has Trump said about it? On Sunday, reporters travelling with the US president asked him about Sweeney. "You'd be surprised at how many people are Republicans," Trump said after a reporter stated that the White Lotus star is a registered Republican."That's what I wouldn't have known, but I'm glad you told me that. If Sydney Sweeney is a registered Republican, I think her ad is fantastic," Trump said on before Trump weighed in, the saga had been the focus of conservative media with some suggesting the advert had been not only a great promotion for American Eagle - but also for the political party.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump contorting justice department into his ‘personal weapon', experts warn
As Donald Trump's Department of Justice expands investigations of his foes and ousts dozens of lawyers and staff who worked on cases targeting himself and his allies, scholars and ex-prosecutors say the rule of law is under siege in the US as the department morphs into Trump's 'personal weapon'. The justice department's politicization to please Trump was underscored by an announcement on 23 July of a new ' strike force' to investigate unsubstantiated charges that ex-president Barack Obama and top officials conspired to hurt Trump's 2016 campaign and his presidency with inquiries into Russian influence operations to help Trump win, say critics. The announcement came the day after Trump dodged queries from reporters about the justice department's failure to produce long-promised files about the notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and pivoted to blast Obama without evidence for 'treason'. Trump's conspiratorial charge echoed dubious claims by his national intelligence director, Tulsi Gabbard, who days before called for a justice department inquiry into a purported 'treasonous conspiracy'. Likewise, the FBI earlier in July announced investigations into the ex-FBI director James Comey and ex-CIA director John Brennan, which critics see as political efforts to placate Trump who has often voiced anger at them for their roles in the Russia investigations before and during his first term. Legal scholars and ex-prosecutors say Trump and his loyal attorney general, Pam Bondi, have turned the justice department into his personal law firm to pursue his political and legal agendas. 'It's not unprecedented for presidents to deploy their powers for personal ends, but no one including Nixon has done this with the intensity of Trump,' Peter Shane, who teaches constitutional law at New York University, told the Guardian. Shane added: 'DoJ is now being used as a personal weapon on behalf of Trump to a degree that is without precedent. Trump has a team of sycophants and enablers at DoJ. They're not behaving the way office holders sworn to uphold the constitution are expected to behave. 'The idea that the Obama administration fabricated the story of Russian interference has been refuted multiple times, including by the Senate intelligence committee when, under the chairmanship of then senator Marco Rubio, the committee determined that Russia had indeed launched an aggressive covert effort to interfere in the 2016 election on Trump's behalf.' Other scholars raise similar alarms. 'Trump is using the justice department to target his perceived enemies and pursue his political goals,' said Randall Eliason, a former federal prosecutor who now lectures on law at George Washington University. 'The guiding principle for any DoJ prosecutor has always been loyalty to the constitution and the rule of law. Under this administration, it appears that the primary job requirement for any DoJ prosecutor, up to and including the attorney general, is loyalty to Donald Trump.' The premium that Trump has placed on loyalty at the justice department was revealed early by his choices of Bondi as attorney general, Todd Blanche as deputy attorney general and other senior officials. Bondi, an ex-Florida attorney general, helped defend Trump in the Senate during his first impeachment, and Blanche was his lead counsel in New York where Trump was convicted in 2024 of 34 felony counts for falsifying business records to hide payments during his 2016 campaign to a porn star who alleged an affair with him. The justice department's drive to please Trump was evident in July when Bondi fired about 20 departmental employees. They included support staff and several prosecutors who worked on January 6 cases for special counsel Jack Smith, who charged Trump with improperly retaining hundreds of classified documents after he left office in early 2021, and for engaging in an 'unprecedented criminal effort' to stay in power after his 2020 election loss. Notably, Bondi this month abruptly fired without explanation the department's top ethics official, Joseph Tirrell, and Maureen Comey, a key prosecutor in New York who had worked on charges against Epstein and is James Comey's daughter. Several senior justice department and FBI officials were ousted in the first months of Trump's second presidency. For their part, Trump and Bondi have been blunt about axing lawyers and staff they deem political foes for allegedly politicizing the justice department against Trump. In February, for instance, Trump ordered the department to oust all remaining 'Biden-era' US attorneys, claiming the department 'has been politicized like never before' under Biden. In a similar vein, before taking office Bondi pledged during a confirmation hearing to eliminate what she blasted as 'the partisanship, the weaponization' of the Department of Justice under Biden. Some ex-prosecutors say Trump's charges that he was the victim of justice department weaponization stem from his penchant for conspiratorial thinking. 'The inane claims of weaponization we hear from Trump and his associates are particularly extraordinary because Trump regularly calls for the criminal investigation and prosecution of his political enemies,' said Daniel Richman, a former federal prosecutor who is now a law professor at Columbia University. 'Baseless claims of crimes by his political opponents have always been a staple of Trump's rants. But now that he is president and has picked justice department leaders for their loyalty and not their competence or integrity, the risk of abusive investigations grows.' The justice department's intense focus on targeting Trump critics was evident after Bondi became attorney general when she quickly issued a memo establishing a 'weaponization' working group, say critics. Barbara McQuade, who teaches law at the University of Michigan and used to be a federal prosecutor, said Bondi's memo actually 'weaponizes law enforcement and undermines public confidence in government' because it pushes a 'false narrative' about the two special counsel investigations of Trump. McQuade stressed that 'federal grand juries returned indictments in both cases, meaning that they found probable cause that the crimes were committed.' Other justice department veterans have been appalled at its transformation including the wave of firings. Stacey Young, who spent 18 years as a federal litigator at the Department of Justice before leaving voluntarily in January, launched the group Justice Connection to help remaining justice department employees deal with ethical and legal headaches and find jobs for those who want to leave. 'These unprecedented firings at the justice department are growing exponentially,' Young told the Guardian. ' They happen with no notice and no opportunity to be heard, in violation of the Civil Service Reform Act and due process. Many people, and even their supervisors, have no idea why the firings targeted them or why now. Employees now wake up each day wondering if they're going to be next. 'It's screwing with people's lives, and it's also creating a culture of fear among the entire workforce. DoJ leadership is making clear the ability to keep your job is not tied to your performance, your expertise, or your commitment to uphold and defend the constitution.' On 24 July, three justice department officials including Tirrell who were abruptly fired this summer, filed a lawsuit against Bondi seeking reinstatement and back pay arguing that they were axed improperly and without cause. Other ex-federal prosecutors say the department is now being weaponized to please Trump. 'There is literally no reason to fire these people, other than to continue molding the department into Trump's personal law firm,' Mike Romano, an ex-justice department prosecutor who left voluntarily in March after almost four years working on prosecutions of Trump allies who stormed the Capitol on 6 January 2021. 'Trump and Bondi are bringing us back to the spoils system, where the government is not staffed by merit but based on favors, and is not staffed with experts, but with hacks and cronies. As a country, we decided almost 150 years ago that the spoils system is terrible and corrupt.' Further, Bondi and Trump have stepped up attacks on judges who have rebuked justice department lawyers for presenting arguments in court that were specious or failed to respond to judges' queries, several of which have involved the administration's hardline anti-immigrant actions, say critics. 'There are certain things lawyers should avoid doing because they are sure to pique the ire of federal judges,' said ex-federal judge John Jones, who is president of Dickinson College. 'These include patronizing, temporizing, lying and making baseless arguments. The Trump DoJ lawyers have hit them all before multiple judges.' Likewise, Emil Bove III, a key Trump defense lawyer in 2024 who was the justice department's number three for several months before Trump nominated him as a federal appeals court judge that the Senate recently approved, was cited in one whistleblower complaint for telling department lawyers they could flout court orders to further Trump's immigration agenda. More broadly, scholars and justice department veterans see the Trump administration breaking sharply with historical norms and rewriting history to burnish Trump's image. 'The firing of the January 6 prosecutors and the pardons of the Capitol rioters are all part of an effort to whitewash what happened on January 6,' said Eliason. 'The goal is to portray the rioters as the true victims and falsely suggest that the law enforcement professionals who pursued these cases did something wrong. 'A key foundation of our constitutional system is adherence to the rule of law and the independence of the justice system from politics. That's all being discarded by the Trump administration.' Shane likewise stressed: 'Trump has placed his own lawyers in key justice department positions, expecting them to continue thinking of themselves as personal lawyers for Donald Trump, not government lawyers for the president as an office-holder bound by law.'
