The keys to the ruling that overthrew the appointment of Verónica Alcocer as ambassador

This lawsuit was admitted in May of 2023 and the relevant notifications were ordered. Subsequently, in August 2024, on appeal, the Council of State revoked an order of July 13, 2023 in which the termination of the process by procedure was declared.

(We invite you to read: The Prosecutor’s Office returned the case against Armando Benedetti to the Court for illicit enrichment)

In the decision of Council of State ordered to request the Presidency of the Republic so that will provide the email address to notify Alcocer of the demand.

The plaintiff alleged that “the designation violates the provisions of article 126 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, given that the person making the appointment is a public servant bound by marriage or union permanent with the person designated there”, for which he considered that the act of designation of Alcocer as ambassador on a special mission to the Vatican City “was issued in violation of the norm.”

Another point in the lawsuit questioned the recognition of travel expenses, but the Court noted that “the decree of designation as Ambassador on Special Mission foresees her recognition on the scale corresponding to the equivalent position, which is understood as those necessary to cover the costs of travel and maintenance,” Therefore, “it does not constitute any form of remuneration for the services provided, nor are they intended to enrich the personal assets of the person in charge.”

The concept of the Public Ministry supported the demand. He indicated that “the original text of article 126 above established that ‘public servants may not appoint as employees people with whom they are related up to the fourth degree of consanguinity, second degree of affinity, first civil degree, or with whom they are linked by marriage or permanent union.”

This restriction, he adds, was toughened with the 2015 legislative act, the balance of powers reform, which sought to make the exercise of the bureaucratic power of senior State officials more transparent: “Public servants will not be able, in the exercise of their functions, appoint, nominate, or contract with people with whom they are related up to the fourth degree of consanguinity, second of affinity, first civil, or with whom they are linked by marriage or permanent union…

Thus, the concept states that “the principles of morality, transparency and equality of our CPolitical art prevents and repels any form of concentration of power in a few and seeks to ensure that access to public office is not a consequence of nepotistic or clientelistic practices..

And he highlights that: “the President of the Republic violated said provision, because being a public servant and acting in the exercise of his duties, he issued a Decree in which he designated or appointed his wife, Verónica del Socorro Alcocer, as Ambassador on Special Mission. García, person with whom he is linked by marriage or permanent union, which is why the nullity of the first paragraph of this administrative act should be declared.”

However, the defendant (Dapre) opposed the success of the claims and pointed out that for the designation “a concept provided by the Administrative Department of the Public Service in July 2017 was taken into account, according to which the direction of relations international affairs corresponds to the President of the Republic, as provided in article 189, paragraph 2, of the Constitution.”

“In developing this constitutional competence, the President of the Republic can designate both his diplomatic agents and specialized personnel when this is convenient and necessary for the management of foreign policy. On the other hand, he maintains that the designation of an individual as an Ambassador on Special Mission is not a new figure in the legal system and has been used on numerous occasions.“, stated the defendant.

Now, upon resolving the case, the Court found that the orders of article 126 and its amendments are exhaustive. In fact, he recalled that the appointments of close people or those close to him gave rise at the time to the annulment of the re-election of the former attorney. Alejandro Ordóñez.

Then, the ruling indicated that the institution of the Ambassador on Special Mission is regulated by an international legal statute, incorporated into the national legal system by Law 824 of 2003, which implies full compliance with the rules of the exercise of public function.

“The two qualities, Ambassador on Special Mission and spouse or permanent companion of the President of the Republic, are antagonistic: according to article 126, paragraph 1, of the Charter,” the ruling highlights.
​
​”The Colombian legal system characterizes the role of the spouse or permanent companion of the President of the Republic as that of an individual who, due to having a link with the high official, carries out protocol and social assistance tasks in support of the former” (… ) -says the Court’s ruling. And it concludes that “the appointment of Mrs. Verónica Alcocer García as ambassador on a special mission is void of nullity due to the link that unites her with the President of the Republic.”