The controversy surrounding alleged infiltration of the Colombian state by FARC dissidents has exploded once again, and this time with far more damaging implications. The investigative unit of Noticias Caracol has uncovered fresh material that suggests what once seemed like speculation is edging closer to verifiable fact: Dissident fronts may have obtained help from officials within the National Army and the National Directorate of Intelligence (DNI) to evade authorities, build a front business, and even secure legal weapon permits and armored vehicles.
The revelations stem from the seizure of a laptop belonging to dissident commander Calarca Cordoba, a prominent figure in the so-called Segunda Marquetalia network. What investigators found has opened a political storm: Messages, operational plans, and names of apparently cooperative state officials — among them retired General Juan Miguel Huertas, who rejoined the Army and currently heads the Personnel Command, and Wilmar Mejia, a DNI official allegedly linked to advising or supporting dissident operations.
A year-old complaint resurfaces as new evidence deepens the crisis
Despite an initial denunciation more than a year ago, Colombia’s Attorney General’s Office has made virtually no progress in clarifying the allegations, an absence of action that legal analysts and lawmakers have repeatedly questioned. Today, with new layers of evidence and public attention, the question resurfaces with greater urgency: Why has nothing happened, and who benefits from the silence?
How dissident networks allegedly penetrated the army and DNI
At the center of the new scandal is the alleged creation of a “legal-looking” private security company meant to serve as camouflage for dissident movements. According to multiple sources consulted by Noticias Caracol’s investigative team — including two individuals with direct ties to the illegal group — the plan involved securing legal frameworks that would allow dissidents to carry firearms with valid permits, circulate in armored vehicles, and conduct operations under the guise of a registered business. This is where the names of Army General Juan Miguel Huertas and DNI official Wilmar Mejia emerge with force.
General Huertas, according to the extracted communications, supposedly played a key role by facilitating administrative processes within the Personnel Command — an area responsible for naming, reassigning, and retiring Army personnel. Investigators believe that dissidents viewed the command as a strategic point, a space from which they could gain information, influence decisions, and secure operational advantages.
The DNI link appears to have served a different purpose. Wilmar Mejia, identified in the seized documents, is believed to have had contact with individuals close to Calarca Cordoba. According to Noticias Caracol’s reporting, Mejia’s alleged involvement may have included intelligence leaks or guidance useful to evading law-enforcement units.
What makes this revelation even more explosive is that the illegal armed group itself corroborated parts of this information to journalists. In statements cited by Noticias Caracol, dissidents admitted that help from contacts within the army and DNI allowed them to escape at least one major security operation and to anticipate troop movements.
If true, the implications are profound: Elements within Colombia’s security institutions may have enabled dissidents not only to survive but to reorganize.
Why the Attorney General’s Office stayed silent despite early warnings
One of the most troubling aspects of the scandal is the timeline. The initial complaint — based on early intelligence hints and internal alerts — was filed more than a year ago. Yet the Attorney General’s Office did not open a formal line of investigation with significant visible progress. Analysts point to several possible explanations.
First, the case is politically delicate. Any finding of collusion between the army and FARC dissidents’ risks undermining public trust in the government’s security apparatus. Second, the alleged players include high-ranking officials, meaning any investigation would require navigating internal resistance, access to classified files, and potential institutional pushback.
There is also a broader political context. Tensions between President Gustavo Petro’s administration and prosecutors. The government has repeatedly accused the Attorney General’s Office of selective investigations, while critics claim that Petro’s team has slowed or discouraged inquiries involving sensitive security matters.
Observers note that the Attorney General’s Office might have avoided accelerating this investigation due to concerns about destabilizing peace negotiations with dissident factions, talks that Petro’s government has promoted under the framework of “Total Peace.”
However, the resurfacing of these allegations, and the volume of new evidence, has made the silence increasingly untenable. Legal experts warn that failing to act now could amount to institutional negligence.
Antioquia Governor Andres Julian Rendon and the political debate over government–dissident relations
The scandal has also revived long-standing accusations about the relationship between Petro’s government and dissident commander Calarca Cordoba. Among the loudest critics is Antioquia Governor Andres Julian Rendon, who publicly stated — most notably in interviews and through his social media accounts — that the government has maintained “unacceptable proximity” to dissident structures. He has cited meetings, negotiations, and operational concessions as signs of what he believes is an overly permissive attitude toward armed groups.
Rendon has repeatedly warned that the government’s approach risks giving dissidents political relevance and territorial control. His criticism gained traction after Noticias Caracol’s investigation, with Rendon arguing that the new evidence “confirms the dangers” he had been raising for months.
While the Petro administration rejects claims of favoritism toward dissident factions, the lack of swift government action on the Huertas–Mejia allegations has deepened public skepticism. The revelations come at a moment when several regional leaders accuse the government of failing to confront dissident expansion effectively. For Petro’s critics, the scandal reinforces their suspicion that dissident groups have enjoyed political space or indirect benefits under the “Total Peace” initiative.
How the accused officials responded and what dissidents claim
Both men at the center of the scandal have issued responses though many questions remain unanswered. General Juan Miguel Huertas has categorically denied any relationship with dissident groups. In public statements released after the Noticias Caracol reports, he insisted that he has never supported or facilitated illegal actors and framed the accusations as an attempt to discredit his career. He maintains that all his actions within the personnel command have been strictly institutional and that he has no links to any private security project connected to Calarca Cordoba.
Wilmar Mejia, the DNI official mentioned in the seized documents, has also rejected the allegations. He argues that dissident claims are unreliable and that any mention of his name is either a misinterpretation or a deliberate smear. Mejia has requested that internal reviews be conducted to clear his reputation.
Meanwhile, Noticias Caracol’s investigative team emphasized that its findings are supported by sources within the illegal group itself. According to the outlet, dissidents confirmed that they did, in fact, escape security operations thanks to information “that came from inside the state.” The outlet has clarified that it conducted cross-verification with intelligence officials and that the content of Calarca Cordoba’s laptop aligned with testimonies collected independently.
Dissidents reportedly claim that their “contacts” helped them navigate military movements and avoid arrests during at least one high-risk operation. Although they did not publicly confirm the names of the officials involved, their internal correspondence points in the same direction the journalists have uncovered. Their statements, combined with the digital evidence, are what led Noticias Caracol to describe the links as “almost irrefutable.”
A crisis of trust in Colombia’s institutions
The emerging scandal is not merely about individual misconduct; it strikes at the heart of Colombia’s fragile security framework. If dissident networks have succeeded in penetrating state institutions, the consequences could be long-lasting.
The Petro administration faces mounting pressure to act decisively, both to clarify the allegations and to restore credibility. The Attorney General’s Office, meanwhile, faces public mistrust for letting the complaint stagnate for more than a year.
Colombia has seen scandals involving infiltration or corruption before, but the blend of political tensions, peace-process implications, and high-ranking military involvement makes this episode especially volatile. As the investigation unfolds, one question looms large: How deep does the infiltration go and who will be held accountable?