The Investigation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice did not accept a complaint filed against presidential candidate Gustavo Petro Origo, They allegedly invited citizens to receive money in exchange for voting in the congressional elections last March.
(Read: Former Congressman Roberto Jose Herrera arrested for corruption)
A complaint has been filed against Petro for “inciting vote buying during the electoral process”, due to a comment on the social network Twitter in which Petro said: “Through all available networks, ask people if they will get money from vote buyers, do so but vote For Petro and for the charter.”
(Read: After years of hurdles, compensation for displaced people from Las Palmas will be studied)
On the contrary, it is the same mentioned who, on two occasions during the interview, urged citizens not to trade their votes and to choose freely.
Similarly, another complaint was received about some of Petro’s statements on March 11, 2022 from Valparaíso, Chile, to a Colombian media about the corrupt practice of vote buying: “If vote buying wins, I ask the whole community not to sell the vote, but if this path happens, The Colombia remains the same (…) and more if you want to take the fifty thousand bill, take it, but vote for Petro.”
Petro sayings review, The Investigative Chamber said the senator’s analysis of the vote-buying practice did not mean he was publicly calling on people to sell their votes.
(You may be interested in: Abortion: 100 days after sentencing to extend decriminalization, barriers continue)
“On the contrary, it was the same registered official who on two occasions during the interview urged citizens not to trade their votes and to choose freely.”
Petro ‘did not incite any crime’
And regarding the phrase receiving the 50,000 bills, the Investigation Chamber said that the statement “It cannot be understood as an invitation to corrupt voters”Noting that it was made in a sarcastic and sarcastic tone, “indicating that its meaning is not literal, but symbolic.”
It is nothing more than a sarcastic expression that, although alarming in some receivers, is framed within the use of socially acceptable language.
And secondly, because It is a play on words, which means, in the end, that you have to deceive those who make illegitimate proposals, or turn the corrupt into a “rabbit” In the words of the senator himself,” the court said.
(Read: Daniel Quintero: In court, attorney general defends mayor’s suspension)
“In this sense, according to the rules of present speech and everyday communication, what a person said, in the context in which he did it, is nothing more than a sarcastic expression, though causing discomfort in some receivers, within the framework of the use of socially acceptable language, its purpose and communicative value is to invite sectors to vote for Gustavo Petro Urrego,” the court added.
And regarding the trigger, the investigation room said that “The publication cannot objectively be considered as an incitement of any kind to sell votes or to commit any electoral offense, not only because it is temporarily close to the interview, But because it also follows from its content, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he does not engage in criminal incitement of any kind.”
Read more justice news