Human Rights Watch described Petro's statements about prosecutor Barbosa as worrisome

The summit between the President of the Republic and the Attorney General took place at Casa de Nariño on the morning of Monday, January 30. Presidency

The deputy director of Human Rights Watch, john pappierdescribed as worrying the statements made by the president Gustavo Petro in Spain, in which he said that, as head of state, he is head of the Attorney General of the Nation, Francisco Barbosawho has insistently asked for information on the murder of 200 people at the hands of the gulf clan.

It may interest you: The Attorney General made a radical decision for his family in the face of a threat from Gustavo Petro

Pappier also warned that the “growing tensions” between the prosecutor and the president put the country in a “worrying institutional situation.”

“These statements by President Gustavo Petro are worrisome. According to the Political Constitution of 1991, the Prosecutor’s Office is part of the judicial branch and therefore independent of the executive branch,” trilled the deputy director of Human Rights Watch.

In a second trill, pappier warned that “the growing tensions between the prosecutor and the president, motivated by irresponsible attitudes on both sides, put the country in a worrisome institutional situation.” And he pointed out that these tensions occur precisely at a time when the Prosecutor’s Office has the task of “carrying out solid processes” against criminal organizations to advance their submission to justice and in the peace negotiations that the national government is carrying out.

“And this occurs precisely when the Prosecutor’s Office has before it the crucial task of carrying out solid processes against criminal organizations to bring them to justice and of investigating evidence of illegal negotiations.”

The deputy director of Humans Rights Watch commented on the statements by President Gustavo Petro. Twitter.

The deputy director of Human Rights Watch retweeted an analysis made by the lawyer and researcher at the Center for Law, Justice and Society Studies, Of Justice, Rodrigo Uprimny. In the trill, the jurist warned that in this new meeting between the prosecutor Barbosa and President Petro both are wrong: “both Petro and Barbosa are wrong in this confrontation, which is not worthy of the president and the Attorney General, but rather seems like a unacceptable fight of egos”.

It may interest you: Petro affirmed that he is the head of the Attorney General of the Nation: they accuse him of being a “dictator” and of “wanting to violate the division of powers”

Along with the trill, he attached an image with his analysis.

In his analysis, uprimny warns of the absurdity in the statements by President Petro, who was reminded that in Colombia, unlike the United States where the attorney general —a position equivalent to that of Barbosa— in effect he is a subordinate of the president. The Attorney General of the Nation, being part of the judicial branch, does not have a boss. He immediately explained that the interpretation made by the president of article 115 of the Constitution of 1991 It is wrong and unacceptable because of what it could lead to:

“Petro’s thesis is not only absurd but also dangerous: if by being head of state he is head of the Prosecutor, then he would also be head of the courts, congress and all state bodies, which ends the separation of powers and The rule of law. All power concentrated in the president. Unacceptable”.

The deputy director of Humans Rights Watch retweeted the analysis made by the lawyer Rodrigo Uprimny. Twitter.

Therefore, he says that “President Petro should accept the scolding of the Supreme Court, acknowledge that he was wrong to say that he was the head of the Attorney General and reiterate that he respects the autonomy and independence of the Prosecutor’s Office and the judicial branch.”

It may interest you: The Attorney General Francisco Barbosa called Gustavo Petro “irresponsible” for trilling against one of his subordinates: “They put a tombstone on judicial officials'”

Regarding the reaction of the prosecutor Francisco Barbosa, Uprimny said that he is not only wrong in describing the president as a dictator, but that his reaction is “unacceptable”, when what Petro was asking him was about an investigation, a power granted to him by the Constitution in Article 251, which Uprimny reviews in his analysis.

“For his part, the General Prosecutor is wrong to describe Petro as a dictator because he asked him about an investigation into a very serious fact. The president can request information on criminal investigations that have relevance to public order because he is responsible for public order. Moreover, the Attorney General, according to article 251 of the CN, must provide him with this information”.

The lawyer warns, yes, that President Petro should have made his request prudently and in respectful terms, without ignoring that the prosecutor reacted in an unacceptable way, perhaps, according to Uprimny, prosecutor Barbosa “seems to be on the campaign trail.”

“But of course the president should make that request with prudence and in the respectful terms typical of the principle of collaboration between State bodies. He did not do it. Barbosa could have limited himself to demanding prudence and respect but, since he seems to be campaigning, he jumped to describe Petro as a dictator and to feel threatened. An unacceptable reaction.”

Uprimny ended his analysis with a latinazgo to which the president and the prosecutor say they should attend: “I wish they would both put the national interest before and remember the beautiful sentence attributed to Cicero:”Errare humanum est, sed in errore peserverare dementis».