Two messages from President Gustavo Petro published on the social media platform X are at the center of the opening of an investigation against him by the Accusations Commission of the House of Representatives, the only body that can investigate the president of the Republic in Colombia.
That legislative body activated the procedure after Attorney General Gregorio Eljach asked whether there was any investigation against the president to determine if he had participated in politics in favor of his party’s candidate, Ivan Cepeda.
The event comes just five days before the first round of the presidential elections, when there is a blackout period for polls and presidential candidates cannot campaign in public squares. Gloria Arizabaleta, president of the Commission, and a member of the Historic Pact, the ruling party, ordered ex officio the opening of the new process against the head of state based on the two posts that, for the opposition, are proof of his participation in politics.
Two messages from President Gustavo Petro, at the center of an investigation against him by the Accusations Commission
The first of the messages complicating Petro’s situation was published on May 24, together with a video remembering former senator and former magistrate Carlos Gaviria Diaz. President Petro wrote: “Colombia has had candidates who wanted to be philosopher presidents, as Plato, the Greek, wanted. Macron told me in French that I was a philosopher president. I believe it is not a Platonic opportunity but a real one.” Opposition sectors interpreted it as symbolic support for Cepeda and for the political project of the Pact.
The second post was published by the president last Sunday alongside a video of Ivan Cepeda’s campaign closing rally in Barranquilla. “We saw people who become rivers shouting freedom. There are those who want to be worms in order to be stepped on, but many of us want to be flying eagles, Emiliano Zapata used to say,” Petro wrote.
“In a famous fable the black mice wanted to defend themselves from the cat, and they came up with the idea of choosing a white mouse to defend themselves from the cat. The cat/tiger will continue hunting mice. The free men and women will fly. Long live the libertarian Caribbean.”
The tiger, it should be remembered, is the figure used by far-right candidate Abelardo de la Espriella to promote his image, his project, and his political ideology, based mainly on direct attacks against progressivism, with special focus on its figures: President Petro and presidential candidate Cepeda. The attacks against both of them are the main arsenal of De la Espriella in his campaign rallies and in his advertising.
Although several opposition members complained about President Petro’s alleged participation in politics, practically none celebrated the opening of the disciplinary investigation by the Accusations Commission. The reason is that the head of state has barely two months left in office and is on his way out, and on the other hand, the Commission is discredited in the country because no investigation against any president has ever succeeded there.
Doubts about the fate of the accusation against Petro
In addition, in practical terms, the room for progress regarding what that legislative body can do is rather limited. The Commission can open a preliminary investigation, collect evidence, hear testimonies, and eventually file an accusation before the House, but historically its proceedings tend to drag on for years and rarely result in effective political or criminal sanctions.
It is no coincidence that the body has carried for decades the nickname “Commission of Acquittals,” due to the low number of cases that end up succeeding against high-ranking officials.
As if that were not enough, the political composition of the Commission would not help a credible process against Petro move forward either. Its members respond to the majorities and minorities of the House, which turns any investigation against the president into a dispute inevitably crossed by partisan calculations. In Petro’s case, the ruling coalition still retains influence within Congress, while opposition sectors seek to accelerate proceedings before the end of the current presidential term.
That it is an almost inoperative body is also demonstrated by the fact that this is not the first disciplinary investigation Petro faces for alleged improper participation in politics before the Investigation and Accusation Commission of the House. He faces more than seven proceedings for that reason, because on several occasions, disguising his words, he has sought to let his voters know of his support for Ivan Cepeda.
The opposition also knows that, but it seeks at least for the country to learn that there may indeed be plausible grounds to investigate President Petro. With the mere fact that this information is made public, the historical record will remain that there were accusations against the president that should be investigated. Another matter is whether the body responsible for doing so complies with its constitutional mandate.