According to the Attorney General’s Office, there were inconsistencies and falsehoods in the supports presented to the Icbf, by the contractor, regarding the care provided to vulnerable families.
Nariño News.
A disciplinary investigation against two former regional directors of the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare -ICBF- and ten other former servants and officials of the entity is underway by the Attorney General’s Office in Nariño
The investigations would be related to alleged irregularities in the registration and care of vulnerable families served by the Mi Familia Program between 2021 and 2023, a case known as ‘the fake families cartel’.
Those investigated are the former regional directors Luis Carlos España Patiño and María Mercedes Arellano.
Likewise, the then advisor to the General Directorate of the entity and who served as regional director (e), Martha Isabel Tovar Turmequé, and the former coordinator of the Financial Group, Luz Ángela Alvarado Yépez, are involved.
An investigation was also opened against Óscar Abel Hurtado Narváez, coordinator of the Legal Group, César Wilton Lloreda Alvear, Martha Lucía Pepinosa Bravo.
In addition to Daira Vanesa Córdoba, Yudeimi Manco Valle, Myriam Consuelo Tovar Peña, Aura Leonila Benavides and Luz Elena Martínez Recalde.
Icbf in the sights of the Attorney General’s Office
Apparently there were possible irregularities in the selection of the Mi Familia Temporary Union for the execution of the contract, signed for 8,399 million pesos to periodically visit 3,930 families in 16 municipalities,
The initiative sought to prevent child abuse, since apparently it was not authorized and did not meet the required requirements.
Apparent disciplinary offenses in contract signing, execution and supervision are also investigated.
They point out that apparently there were inconsistencies and falsehoods in the supports presented by the UT Mi Familia regarding the care provided to families.
Regarding the supervision of the work, the Ministry investigates whether the alleged falsehoods recorded in the documents that supported the visits would have been noticed in a timely manner..
Likewise, there would have been a possible omission in the adoption of measures in the event of non-compliance by the contractor and for not reporting to the administrative and judicial authorities the possible inconsistencies or falsehoods presented and thus avoiding the detriment of the State’s assets.
In the order opening the investigation, the Attorney General’s Office sent a copy to the Attorney General’s Office to evaluate the admissibility or not of the criminal action.
