The Supreme Court of Justice issued several orders to the National Government, the Police, the Ombudsman’s Office, the Prosecutor’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office to adopt decisions within the framework of the citizen’s protest.
The Government’s response, through the Minister of Defense, Carlos Holmes Trujillo, and President Iván Duque himself, made it clear that he does not share the terms of the ruling and opens the possibility that he intends to delay compliance until the Constitutional Court says the last word on this guardianship.
That position, however, would put the supervised authority, in this case the mindefensa, at risk of jail time for contempt.
For each decision, he gave terms of 48 hours, 30 days and up to six months for each party to move forward in complying with the ruling.
The closest deadline to expire is the request for forgiveness by the Ministry of Defense for the excessive force of the authorities during the marches in November last year. In addition, that the affected parties publish the sentence on their portals. And to the police, stop using the 12-gauge shotguns the Esmad carries. A shotgun of this type was the one that caused the death of the young Dilan Cruz.
According to the Court’s decision, the Government would have to move forward no later than tomorrow in carrying out the orders. The Executive for now responded that it will request the review of the ruling in the Court, but did not mention compliance with the orders.
Jurists opined on the obligation to comply with the ruling:
The lawyer Pedro Nel Escorcia maintained that if the order is firm, it must be complied with or it is in contempt.
“It is not at its discretion, it is a constitutional order and therefore it must strictly comply with it,” said the lawyer, after noting that in this way the Executive files appeals and requests the review of the guardianship in the Constitutional Court, it must abide by the decision of the Supreme Court.
He added that it is not a good precedent that the Executive does not follow the orders of the judges. “These decisions are of immediate protection,” he added.
The criminal lawyer Carlos Gilberto Gómez agreed that the decisions that the judicial authorities adopt at the guardianship headquarters “are mandatory, as long as they are not revoked through hierarchical control (challenge) or through the review that could eventually be carried out the Constitutional Court ”.
He added that “it is about the protection of the validity of the Constitution in each case, and therefore the realization of the fundamental rights of the people. The Government can disagree with a sentence, but cannot ignore it. You will have to challenge or request a review by the Constitutional Court. In short, it must observe the mandate it contains, especially with regard to the protection of the right to peaceful protest.
The lawyer Jesús Albeiro Yepes pointed out that the ruling exceeds the functions of the judges and said that they cannot enter the orbit of the Executive.
“The decision distorts the role of the judge and distorts the value of the guardianship and its character for the defense and protection of the fundamental rights of citizens,” said Yepes.
Likewise, he affirmed that the decision is “impertinent and dangerous” for the control of public order in the country, so the Government would have to seek mechanisms to preserve those constitutional functions on the management of security in the country.
The jurists consulted indicated that incurring contempt could result in an arrest warrant or a fine for the person affected. And that could even have criminal consequences for crimes such as fraud in court resolution.
The arrest is not carried out in a prison.
Read other Justice news