On July 28, Colombia’s judicial system found former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez guilty of witness tampering, specifically for abuse of process and bribing a public official. This unprecedented decision is the first time a successful criminal conviction has been delivered against a former President in Colombia.
This ruling can further inflame or potentially de-escalate these tensions and will serve as a litmus test of the independence and strength of the country’s judicial system. Given Colombia’s highly polarized and tense political environment, the safety and security of all involved in the case could be at risk.
Uribe’s Scandals and Poor Human Rights Record
Countless allegations exist against the former president and his family, including links to paramilitarism and human rights abuses. During his Presidency, several high-profile rights abuse scandals erupted. In the infamous “para-politics” scandal, it was revealed that an estimated thirty percent of politicians, many linked to Uribismo, made deals with right-wing paramilitaries of the Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)—a brutal narco-trafficking group that committed crimes against humanity and was designated by the U.S. as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).
In another scandal, the intelligence agency reporting directly to Mr. Uribe was found to have illegally surveilled, sabotaged, and persecuted political opponents, judges, journalists, and human rights defenders. While many of Uribe’s allies, former staff, and family members were investigated, jailed, and others silenced, he evaded justice until now. While this decision does not convict Mr. Uribe of his involvement in those scandals, many victims of those abuses see this as a long-overdue step in their pursuit of justice.
Uribe’s Popularity Among Security Hardliners
Given Mr. Uribe’s enduring popularity among security hardliners, who supported his “iron-fist” U.S.-backed “democratic security” policies, his supporters are likely to rally in defense. In fact, efforts are already underway to discredit the credibility and impartiality of Judge Sandra Liliana Heredia. Uribe supporters are also utilizing the erroneous narrative that he is a victim of “lawfare” or political persecution. The legal process against him, however, began thirteen years prior, at a time when there was no indication that Colombia would elect a left-wing government.
A Case 13 Years In the Making
The case was opened in 2012, when Mr. Uribe filed a defamation lawsuit against then-Congressman Ivan Cepeda. Cepeda had presented testimony from two individuals who alleged that Mr. Uribe and his brother founded a paramilitary group called the Bloque Metro. One of the witnesses, currently imprisoned, was the foreman of the Uribe family’s estate, where the group was allegedly formed. In 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed the case against Cepeda.
That’s when the tables of justice turned against Uribe. In August 2020, he was placed under house arrest as a preventative measure. Then resigned as Senator so that the case against him would no longer fall under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, but rather to Attorney General Francisco Barbosa. Barbosa, an Uribe ally, was appointed Attorney General from a list provided by former Uribe protégé President Ivan Duque. While in office, Barbosa attempted to dismiss the case against Uribe.
Once Barbosa left office, the case continued and culminated in Judge Sandra Liliana Heredia of the Circuit Court of Bogota delivering the decision in a marathon ten-hour reading of the sentence. The sentencing hearing is scheduled for Friday, August 1. He could be fined and face upwards of nine years in jail, though experts believe that, due to his age, he may be sentenced to house arrest. His legal team has announced that they will appeal the decision.
Smear Campaigns Against the Lawyers, Witnesses, and the Judge
On July 15, 2025, the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective (Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo, CAJAR) denounced new attacks from former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez against the organization and lawyer Reinaldo Villalba Vargas, who represents Senator Iván Cepeda in the Uribe case. These attacks violate rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) and heighten the risks to the safety and physical integrity of these human rights defenders.
The false accusations, alleging links to guerrilla groups and criminal actors, echo past patterns of persecution and are part of a broader smear campaign encouraging aggression against CAJAR, Villalba, and Cepeda. Both Cepeda and Villalba have filed criminal complaints with Colombia’s Attorney General’s Office. Journalists from the podcast series El Reporte Coronell revealed an alleged plot to discredit Senator Cepeda and lawyer Miguel Angel del Rio.
Since the decision, high-ranking members of Colombia’s political opposition have tried to spin a narrative that the case was politically motivated revenge and is full of judicial flaws. In particular, Judge Sandra Liliana, who handed down the ruling against former president Uribe, has been subject to threats and defamation on social media. These attacks against Judge Heredia prompted the National Protection Unit (Unidad Nacional de Protección, UNP) to announce that they are looking into reinforcing her protection measures. The Human Rights Ombudsman’s office called on everyone to respect the independence of the judiciary and the protection of female judges.
U.S. Should Not Interfere in Judicial Independence
Despite the politicization of this case, it restores many Colombians’ public trust in the justice system and democratic institutions and mitigates the risk of intensified political violence and instability. It will draw international attention and shape how the country handles future cases involving high-ranking officials, from all sides of the political spectrum. For decades, the U.S. has invested financial resources and political capital in improving Colombia’s justice system precisely so it can make decisions in an independent and transparent manner. U.S. officials should support this process without interfering in it and guarantee the protection of the justice system, witnesses, and lawyers.
