Armando Benedetti is called to expand the investigation for alleged money laundering

The senator assured on his social networks that they are not really investigating him, but that, “they are looking for a crime”

Guardar

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of Justice again summoned Senator Armando Benedetti to expand his statement in the case against him for alleged money laundering. The proceedings will take place next Friday, April 1, in the office of Cristina Lombana, the magistrate of the high court's investigative chamber.

The proceedings against the congressman began because of his income tax return that he filed with DIAN. According to the Court, when crossing expenses, investments and purchases, the sum of money is not proportional to the resources he acquires as a senator of the Republic.

“Based on the analysis of Mr. Armando Benedetti's real cash flow, he has to justify $2,919,809,595 that does not come from his economic activity,” the Supreme Court explained, considering that the senator reported being a salaried employee as the only economic activity. These irregularities in his patrimony begin since 2002.

Following the Supreme Court summons, Armando Benedetti reacted to it on his Twitter account. “One year ago I was opened an investigation for illicit enrichment. Since there was neither a witness nor evidence, they change the crime without justification, is that not persecution? They're not investigating me, they're looking for a crime. I have 7 investigations, 300 witnesses and nothing they let me go,” wrote the senator.

In turn, he indicated that on December 10 he asked Lombana that the extension of his inquiry take place after all the evidence in his defense had been ordered. “I will go to court with my advocate to check if my evidence has already been ordered,” he added.

Armando Benedetti reacts to Supreme Court summons
Armando Benedetti reacts to Supreme Court summons. Screenshot.

On the other hand, the congressman has stated on previous occasions that the judge in the case has not taken into account the loans and the benefits of extensions she has. “Because I am a legislator, I have a code, which is 8411, a code before the DIAN, because of my economic activity, but do you know on the basis of what they did the study to me? With 0010, which is that of the employee,” Benedetti commented, according to Blu Radio.

Investigations by the Prosecutor's Office

In the preliminary inquiries of the Attorney General's Office, it was determined that there were alleged irregularities in Benedetti's assets. In the midst of the investigation, last year the judiciary occupied eight buildings owned by the senator and three others belonging to other people, among them was the apartment in Altos del Retiro located in the north of Bogotá.

In the past, Ruby Corredor Díaz, a woman accused of having sold the apartment to the senator, could not justify the origin of $1.6 billion for the purchase of that same apartment. Before selling it to Benedetti, he had acquired it through an auction held by the former National Narcotics Directorate.

The Prosecutor's Office charged Corredor with the alleged crimes of money laundering and illicit enrichment in 2009. As El Tiempo explained last year, the decision was taken by a prosecutor from the direction of extinction of dominion in the case against 'a non-gauged individual'.

With regard to the termination of dominion, the judicial body assured that it is all an investigation carried out in conjunction with the Instruction Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, which states that this apartment is part of property that is the product “of an alleged unjustified increase in assets by Senator Armando Benedetti”.

Information from the DIAN allowed it to establish that the congressman would present assets to be justified corresponding to 2009, 2014, 2016 and 2017. “These would be possible fraudulent maneuvers by the senator to incorporate into his estate, through a third person, a good of considerable value which was alienated in the auction process by the extinct National Narcotic Drugs Directorate and which would have caused detriment to the public administration”, reads the communication.

KEEP READING:

Guardar