Bogotá (EFE).- The magistrates of the Constitutional Court of Colombia met with the attorney general, Luz Adriana Camargo, to warn her of possible acts of espionage of which they may be victims in the highest court of the country, as revealed by this Saturday the newspaper El Tiempo.
The magistrates, in a private meeting, told the prosecutor that they have received information from “absolutely credible sources” about possible espionage on judges, something familiar for the country where there have been several cases of espionage in the judicial system.
According to El Tiempo, at the meeting “there was talk of alleged surveillance, espionage on substantive issues that have been discussed and alleged illegal interceptions” and they officially asked the Prosecutor’s Office to verify “if it is true that for months “He carried out intelligence work against members of the Court.”
Among the possible evidence there is information on alleged wiretapping with cell phone interceptions of magistrates and other officials with information on sensitive and confidential processes.
The shadow of espionage that falls over Colombia
The case of the “illegal eavesdropping” or “chuzadas” was a scandal that was reported during the Government of Álvaro Uribe (2002-2010), after it was known that the defunct Administrative Department of Security (DAS), which carried out the tasks intelligence, installed microphones in the Supreme Court of Justice and intercepted the phones of many personalities, including judges, journalists and opponents.
In this case, Bernardo Moreno, former secretary of the Presidency of Colombia, and María del Pilar Hurtado, former head of the DAS, among others, were convicted in this case, who were found responsible for several crimes by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice.
In September 2017, former DAS director Jorge Noguera was also sentenced to seven years, 10 months and 15 days in prison as co-author of the crime of aggravated conspiracy in that scandal for carrying out “interceptions of private communications, surveillance and surveillance without order of judicial authority.”
