The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Having before it the case of Ms. Piedad del Socorro Zuccardi de García, a member of the Colombian Senate, which has been examined by the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians, pursuant to the Procedure for the treatment by the Inter-Parliamentary Union of communications concerning violations of the human rights of members of parliament,

Considering the following sequence of judicial steps against Senator Zuccardi, who, like any Colombian member of Congress, is investigated and judged in single-instance proceedings by the Supreme Court in criminal matters:

• On 28 June 2010, a preliminary investigation was opened on the instructions of the Supreme Court on the basis of suspicions that Senator Zuccardi de García, of Colombian and Italian nationality, had cooperated during the 2000-2003 period with paramilitary groups; the investigations were launched following statements made in 2009 by a paramilitary member who had been demobilized and was seeking to benefit under the Justice and Peace Act;

• On 12 June 2012, the Office of the Procuraduría (Procurator-General) sought the closure of the investigation and the dropping of charges, one of the two grounds being that there was no reasonable evidence or information to indicate that the Senator might have been involved in any kind of alliance with paramilitary groups, particularly for the purpose of securing electoral backing for herself or anyone else;

• On 11 February 2013, the Supreme Court issued an arrest warrant which was acted upon on 23 February, despite the protests of the defence; on 5 March 2013, the Supreme Court decided to charge the Senator with aggravated criminal association and place her in provisional detention;

• The Supreme Court decided in early August 2013 to close the investigation phase of the case, opening a legal time limit of 20 days for the defence to file its motion to dismiss; the reopening of the investigation was sought by the defence following the inclusion of a strongly contested statement, which was nevertheless rejected by the Court scheduling the filing of the defence motion for 20 September 2013; the decision of the Supreme Court on any committal for trial is expected in October 2013,

Considering also that the preliminary investigation reportedly exceeded the time limit prescribed in Article 325 of Law No. 600 of 2000, namely six months, and that Article 239 of Law No. 600, authorizing the transfer of evidence, the validity of the technical investigations, the right to a public trial and the guarantee of adversarial procedure, was violated,

Considering also that the source states with regard to the evidence-taking and the impartiality of the Supreme Court, that:

• Several witnesses have cast doubt on the impartiality and methods of the investigators; those witnesses reported pressure and intimidation to the Supreme Court, but that Court did not initiate any investigation;

• The auxiliary magistrate of the Supreme Court handling the case transfers testimony out of context and denies the defence a full reading of the proceedings of previous hearings; for example, the source emphasizes that the auxiliary magistrate systematically distorts the form of witness statements to modify such terms as "You have said that…" instead of "I have heard that…" (witness Alias Diego VECINO);

• The Supreme Court authorizes and conducts the transfer of evidence and testimony from other proceedings to include them in the present proceedings, without allowing the defence access to a full reading of all the external records, or while the transfer of evidence is only partial;

• Although the Supreme Court decided in early August 2013 to close the investigation phase of the case, it decided subsequently to add further material to the file, notably the statement of a former mayor, Mr. Torres Serra, incriminating the Senator; but Mr. Torres Serra was sentenced in October 2012 to 35 months’ imprisonment for malicious accusation of the Senator because of those same statements;

• Those in charge of the investigations were incriminated in particular by a witness (alias NEVER) for having exerted pressures and extracted a false testimony for the prosecution against Senator Zuccardi de García; that witness reportedly filed a complaint to this effect with the public prosecutor’s office (Fiscalía), but the Supreme Court refused to include either the complaint or the records of investigations conducted in this regard as evidence;

• The Court uses police reports as prosecution evidence without ever checking the information in them,

Recalling that in June 2012 the President of Colombia formally objected to a legislative initiative for judicial reform proposing inter alia the establishment of an appeal instance in the procedure applicable to members of Congress in criminal cases, and that his objection subsequently led Congress to dismiss the initiative; recalling also that an IPU mission travelled to Bogotá in August 2011 to help strengthen the National Congress of Colombia and, as part of that assignment, formulated a series of recommendations, including with a view to helping ensure greater respect for fair-trial standards in criminal cases against members of Congress,

Considering that the IPU Secretary General, at the invitation of the outgoing President of the Colombian Congress, was invited to address the Colombian Senate on 4 June 2013 to discuss ways of strengthening the work of the Colombian Congress, inter alia in order to ensure adequate legal protection for its members,

Bearing in mind that Colombia is a party to the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and is therefore legally bound to ensure full respect for the right to a fair trial,

1. Recalls its concerns regarding respect for fair-trial guarantees in criminal proceedings against members of the Congress of Colombia, the credibility of testimonies of demobilized paramilitaries and the manner in which they are obtained and used in criminal cases against members of parliament;

2. Considers, in the light of these concerns, which include the lack of any possibility of appeal, that it is all the more important that the proceedings in the case of Senator Zuccardi strictly comply with due process;

3. Is therefore deeply concerned that the general concerns about fair trial in criminal proceedings against Colombian parliamentarians are aggravated in the case at hand by allegations of further extensive and serious irregularities, including the inclusion of testimony, after the closure of the investigation, from someone who was sentenced to a prison term for perjury on account of his false statements implicating Senator Zuccardi;

4. Trusts that the Supreme Court will take due account of all the material presented by the defence in deciding whether or not to commit the case for trial; eagerly awaits therefore the ruling of the Supreme Court in this regard;

5. Considers it crucial, in the light of the aforesaid concerns about due process, to send a trial observer to follow the proceedings should the Supreme Court decide to commit the case for trial; requests the Secretary General to make the necessary arrangements to this end;

6. Remains convinced that concerns about the lack of fair-trial standards inherent in the procedure applicable to Colombian members of Congress in criminal matters can only be fully addressed through new legislation; is aware that enhanced legal protection for members of Congress is a very sensitive subject in Colombia, as it is easily perceived as unduly serving the interest of its members; expresses the hope, therefore, that the National Congress, along with the executive, judicial and administrative authorities, will come out together in support of new legislation that will introduce a genuine separation between the investigating authorities and the courts and a real possibility for members of Congress to appeal; encourages the IPU and the current Colombian parliamentary authorities to continue to work closely together for this purpose;

7. Requests the Secretary General to convey this decision to the competent authorities and to the source;

8. Decides to continue examining this case.

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 129th IPU Assembly and related meetings" in PDF format (file size 1121 Kb approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.

HOME PAGEHUMAN RIGHTSMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS