Defense unveils the Attorney General’s Office’s set-up against youths of Primera Línea in Pasto

Defense unveils the Attorney General’s Office’s set-up against youths of Primera Línea in Pasto

On the morning of March 23, 2022, the human rights lawyer Sebastián Escobar, member of the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers Collective -Cajar-, in defense of Leici Mercedes Benavides Madroñero, one of the members of the First Line of Pasto, detained in December 2021 and charged with multiple crimes for events that occurred in April, June and September 2021 in the framework of the National Strike, presented his arguments before the second municipal judge of control of guarantees of Pasto against the indictment and request for the imposition of security measures. The lawyer also denounced a pattern of illegality in the collection and appreciation of the material evidence presented by the 4th Specialized Prosecutor’s Office of Pasto in this case. 

The arrest of Leici Benavides and eight other persons (1) in the context of the protests, was due to acts of vandalism that occurred in the city of Pasto, against the facilities of the DIAN in that city, the office of the Registry of Public Instruments, the Registrar’s Office and attacks on public transportation. The crimes charged are conspiracy to commit crimes for the purpose of terrorism, terrorism, arson, damage to property belonging to others, unlawful restraint and obstruction of public roads.

In the case of the leader Leici Mercedes Benavides, the Prosecutor’s Office was unable to present elements that would allow it to fully conclude that she was present at the scene of the events. These elements are testimony from a source whose identity is confidential and who also acts as an undercover agent, some videos provided by the Prosecutor’s Office, and some telephone interceptions. 

The videos claimed to identify Leici Benavides for wearing a white helmet, black clothing and a flag on her back, however, in those videos more than 50 people can be seen wearing the same helmet, flag and T-shirt to which the undercover witness refers to identify her. And even if it were her, her defense explained, the images themselves show that she walks in front of the building and does not participate in the vandalism. Regarding the telephone interceptions, these prove that Leici Mercedes was in a different location on the date of the alleged acts.   

The actions of an undercover agent were also questioned, presumably the same witness with identity reserve, since he did not inform about an operation in which he would participate in the workplace of one of the “indiciados” that required prior authorization from the Judge of Control of Guarantees. He is Andrés Benavides, who in the arguments of the Prosecutor’s Office during the proceedings is referred to as alias “El Maestro”. The defense demonstrated that the undercover operation carried out in his workshop was done without judicial authorization, and that the Prosecutor’s Office made false statements about an alleged report of the raid in which explosive devices were found in his house. Not only was this not the case, but the items had actually been seized from people who are now prosecution witnesses for the Prosecutor’s Office and presumably from the person who had acted both as a non-formal source (witness) and undercover agent. 

Regarding the statements of the aforementioned undercover witness, it is noteworthy that they provide information on the three events under investigation that occurred in April, July and September 2021, placing this person in all the scenarios where the acts of vandalism occurred. Therefore, the defense concludes that “the evolution of the testimony of this witness has been directly proportional to the evolution of the investigation by the Attorney General’s Office”.   

On the other hand, there were documented acts of investigation that exceeded the judicial police orders, in particular the selective search in the database to obtain the CDRs of the telephone calls outside the hours covered by the judicial order.  Additionally, conjectures were made about the language used by the defendants in some telephone interceptions presented by the Prosecutor’s Office in which they are attributed the use of encrypted language to refer to possible explosive devices, but the reasons that led to these conclusions were never made explicit and the contents do not allow to conclude the inference of responsibility in the case of the defendant. For example, Leici, as a restaurant owner, talks about potatoes for cooking, and the prosecution concluded that it was a conversation about explosive devices.  

The defense also presented evidence of alleged pressure on the main witness for Prosecutor 4a, the young Sebastián Caipe Oliva. In this regard, he called attention to his untimely decision to change his lawyer, the offers of benefits by the Prosecutor’s Office even when he could not legally offer them, as well as the entry of his girlfriend to the SIJIN, where he was detained, even when his defense lawyer was unable to do so. 

For all these reasons, the lawyer Sebastián Escobar requested the judge to not decree a security measure against the defender and leader Leici Mercedes Benavides, since it has not been proven that she could obstruct justice in this case, nor that she represents a danger to society. On the contrary, both she and the other defendants have shown their willingness to cooperate with justice and have presented themselves at all judicial proceedings.  

Faced with the argument of the 4th Prosecutor’s Office of alleged threats against Sebastián Caipe by the other accused, the defense attorney explained that the complaint was filed until February of this year, although the facts would have occurred in December, and added that it is striking that it is filed when the Prosecutor’s Office needs it, taking into account the elements already presented. He also opened the question about which cell phone the threatening calls and messages were directed to, if Caipe Oliva’s phone is under custody of the Prosecutor’s Office, and none of them has had access to Sebastián, who remains in custody.  

The defense concluded that the authorship of Leici Mercedes Benavides in these events has not been accredited and that the Prosecutor’s Office, far from wanting to clarify the responsibility for these acts of violence and vandalism, seeks to make its thesis prevail based on biases and stigmatizations that have characterized the judicial persecution against the social mobilization.  

The proceedings will continue this Friday, March 25 at 8:30 am with the intervention of the other defense attorneys. In past sessions, the Public Prosecutor’s Office had already questioned the support of the Attorney General’s Office.  

(1) The defendants are Leici Mercedes Benavides Madroñero, Edinson Raúl Araujo Rivera, Diego Arturo Maya España, Javier Eduardo Erazo Benavides, Daniel Armando Jiménez Grijalba, Daniel Esteban Ramírez Ríos, Sebastián Caipe Oliva and Luis Felipe Delgado Saavedra, the latter are still in custody. 

+ posts
Share This