Judge Leonel Rogeles Moreno, of the Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Bogotá, denied suspending the provisional measure presented by the defense of former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez against the house arrest issued last Friday by the 44th judge of Bogotá. Former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez questioned the sentence against him:"A 1,114-page sentence turned into a political speech." https://t.co/if1kX8q65f — Semana Magazine (@RevistaSemana) August 1, 2025
In the five-page ruling, the reporting judge considered that the requested provisional measure “does not meet the standards of urgency, necessity, and non-postponability” required by law for “the constitutional judge to intervene from the beginning of the protection process.”
Because of this, he left the final answer to the judge who must resolve the merits of the claims of the tutela action that was filed this Monday, August 4, by the defense of former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez, requesting the protection of five fundamental rights.
“There are no reasons for, at this stage of the tutela process, to suspend the order issued by the judicial authority in question: maximum that, except for the nonconformity of the act with the judicial decision, at the moment no irregularity is noted that is of the necessary magnitude to estimate a relevant affectation to the fundamental rights of the aforementioned”, warns one of the sections of the decision.
The reporting judge noted that the measure cannot be granted based solely on the plaintiff's statement, which he described as"arbitrary," since this will be part of the substantive study of the legal action.
"He can evade justice by leaving the country": this is the reason why former President Álvaro Uribe Vélez was ordered under house arrest. https://t.co/if1kX8q65f — Revista Semana (@RevistaSemana) August 1, 2025
“With the evidence provided to the amparo action, it is hasty to determine that the decision of the requested state ‘is arbitrary’, since it will only be once the exercise of the contradiction is guaranteed that it can be determined if this is so, as described by the plaintiff in the introductory brief,” the decision states.
It is then noted that "since this is a legal debate that is purely argumentative and involves the interpretation of constitutional norms, criminal procedure and jurisprudential precedents, it will only be once the case is analyzed as a whole that it can be determined whether the decision met the minimum requirements in these matters to order the application of the measure."
In a decision released on the afternoon of August 1, the 44th District Court of Bogotá ordered former President Uribe to be placed under house arrest to serve his 12-year prison sentence for his involvement in the crimes of procedural fraud and bribery in criminal proceedings.
In that determination, it was considered that the measure was"necessary" since - due to his economic capital and influence - the former president could leave the country, which would affect the fair administration and delivery of justice.
Based on these events, the former president's defense team filed a tutela action in which it demanded the protection of the fundamental rights to human dignity, due process, the presumption of innocence, and freedom.
