Investigation against General Rodolfo Palomino for abuse of authority filed

After responding to the request of the Attorney General's Office, the Special Trial Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice precluded the investigations being carried out against retired generals Rodolfo Palomino Bautista, Carlos Ramiro Mena and Edgar Sánchez Morales for their alleged involvement in the crimes of abuse of authority for arbitrary and unjust act.

The former director of the National Police and the other two officers were being prosecuted for allegedly exercising undue pressure against Colonel Mario Aurelio Pedraza Sandoval and his family, to withdraw their complaint and refrain from reporting to the media the existence of acts of corruption and ill administrative handling in the promotion process.

When Colonel Pedroza Sandoval had claimed that, although his resume was faultless and he had all the required experience, his name was not taken into account for promotion to Brigadier General. It was for this reason that he filed a complaint with the General Advisory Board and the Ministry of Defence.

So that Pedroza would not continue with these statements, on October 3, 2012, he was summoned by Palomino, who was deputy director of the police at the time, to a meeting with his wife and children and Generals Mena and Sánchez, both superiors of Pedroza's sons. According to the complaint, this meeting existed to intimidate him and arrest him in his accusations.

Former Police Director Rodolfo Palomino acknowledged to the Prosecutor's Office that the meeting did indeed happen, but that “it was a matter of cordial solidarity for not having been called up for promotion.”

But Pedroza stated in the complaint that there were acts of reprisal for the denunciations to his superiors. One of them was that days after graduating one of his sons, he was transferred to the Amazon. Decision they saw influenced by the actions they had taken.

This case had already been precluded once. On February 26, 2019, the First Instance Chamber of the Supreme Court had taken the decision, but in March 2020 the Criminal Chamber revoked that determination because “the request for preclusion was not adequately demonstrated, and the investigative omissions were evident in the face of the complaint.”

The prosecutor in charge stated during the proceedings that “only until May 7, 2020 the case was handed over to another office in the entity after it returned from the Supreme Court of Justice, at which time the statute of limitations was applied.”

“On April 7, 2020, the deadline for issuing a judgment expired, taking into account that the investigating body had a period of seven years and six months from the commission of the facts to carry out the investigation,” the official continued.

For its part, the defense opposed this argument and pointed out to the Prosecutor's Office that the harassment against Colonel Pedroza continued after 2013, and then, the time to investigate the facts has not yet expired.

The Public Prosecutor's Office official contradicted and stated that “the facts cannot be reviewed in isolation because they allegedly intended to prevent Colonel Pedroza from making public claims.”

This process had already been shelved in 2019, but the high court decided to reopen the case and, now that it precludes it, it will be the Criminal Chamber in the second instance that makes a final decision.

KEEP READING: