The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) decided to close its investigation into the murder last year of Colombian senator and presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe Turbay, clearing the state of responsibility for the assassination that shocked the country six months ago and that has not left all political players in the South American nation equally satisfied.
As an autonomous body of the Inter-American System, IACHR’s functions include assessing requests for human rights protection in situations of serious, urgent, and irreparable risk. The family of the murdered senator turned to the Commission after the attack that ended his life and after multiple complaints regarding the security the state was supposed to provide to prevent acts of violence with possible political motivations.
However, the decision adopted on Jan. 27 and made public only now determined that, in this case, the necessary conditions to maintain precautionary measures under international criteria were not met.
IACHR closes Miguel Uribe murder case, clears Colombia of responsibility
IACHR’s resolution was clear in stating that the precautionary measures requested by Uribe Turbay’s family no longer met the requirements of serious, urgent, and irreparable risk that characterize this type of exceptional protection, and therefore it decided to archive the request.
In its reasoning, the Commission noted that the Colombian state provided evidence of “serious, independent, and adequate” criminal investigations, as well as the adoption of new security arrangements for the family, which mitigated the risks the precautionary measures sought to prevent.
“This decision, in any case, does not affect the obligations the state continues to have with respect to persons who may find themselves in a situation of risk, in accordance with applicable international standards,” the Commission explained.
Nevertheless, the interpretation of this decision has generated a strong reaction in various sectors. The family’s legal defense, represented by attorney Victor Mosquera, has emphasized that the closure of the precautionary measures does not imply a substantive ruling on state responsibility for the events, and that the risk that motivated the initial request already materialized with Uribe Turbay’s death.
For their part, some sectors of the Colombian government have interpreted the IACHR’s decision as a sign of support for the state’s actions, which have included the implementation of more robust investigation and protection protocols since the June 2025 attack.
This reading, however, has not been shared by everyone, and some analysts warn that it may give rise to a perception of impunity or insufficient attention to previous failures in protecting political leaders, especially in the context of electoral campaigns that have historically been marked by episodes of violence in Colombia.
Echoes in public opinion and debate over responsibilities
Public and political reaction to the IACHR’s decision was swift. For many citizens, the closure of the international case raises doubts about the effectiveness of the protection mechanisms available in Colombia and about the international community’s ability to ensure justice in cases of political violence.
For others, by contrast, the resolution represents confirmation that the country’s internal judicial process is moving forward solidly, without the need for prolonged intervention by external bodies. This polarization reflects, in many ways, the deep division that Uribe Turbay’s assassination left in society and that persists.
From a human rights perspective, experts note that the case opens a broader discussion about how political leaders are protected in contexts of high confrontation and how the state’s internal competencies are balanced with the international obligations imposed by bodies such as IACHR.
The decision to close the precautionary measures, however, does not close the judicial case or the expectations of the family and of broad sectors of society seeking truth and full justice.
The matter continues in Colombian courts, while IACHR maintains structural monitoring of the case, emphasizing the importance of investigations continuing without interference and with full respect for international standards.
Ultimately, the IACHR’s decision is a new milestone in a tragedy that marked Colombia’s contemporary history and that will continue to generate debate over security, justice, and the protection of leaders in democratic spaces.
The assassination that shook Colombia’s political landscape
The murder of opposition senator and presidential hopeful Miguel Uribe Turbay once again confronted Colombia with one of its most persistent ghosts: violence against political leaders.
The crime occurred during a public event in Bogota and prompted an immediate outpouring of condemnation from all sectors, as well as a strong impact on the electoral landscape.
Uribe Turbay was attacked by a hired teenage gunman while taking part in a campaign activity. He was shot multiple times and, despite being rushed to a medical center, died days later from the severity of his injuries. His death cut short a rising political career and set off alarms about security conditions for those seeking the presidency.
The investigation was taken over by the Attorney General’s Office, which, from the outset, treated the case as a politically motivated crime. Authorities identified and captured the material perpetrator of the attack, as well as other individuals who allegedly participated in the logistics and planning of the assassination. Part of the process has focused on determining who ordered the killing and whether organized criminal structures were behind it.
Throughout the investigation, possible links to illegal armed groups were assessed, although official conclusions have been partial and the subject of public debate. Delays in clarifying the intellectual authorship and contradictory accounts have drawn criticism from the opposition and from sectors of civil society.
International organizations called on the Colombian State to guarantee a thorough investigation and to adopt effective protection measures for political leaders.
The case of Miguel Uribe Turbay thus became a symbol of the risks that persist for political activity in the country and a test of the institutional capacity to provide truth, justice, and guarantees of non-repetition — responsibility from which IACHR has now cleared the Colombian state.