Human Trafficking and César Mauricio Velásquez: From the Presidential Palace to a Criminal Conviction
By Staff Writer
For years, César Mauricio Velásquez was one of the most influential communications officials in the administration of former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez. A journalist by training, academic, and senior government official, his career took him from university classrooms and newsrooms to the highest levels of the Colombian Presidency.
Born in Medellín, Velásquez studied Journalism and Mass Communication at Universidad de La Sabana. He later completed graduate studies in television and international relations. Before joining the government, he worked as a political journalist, university professor, dean of the School of Communication at Universidad de La Sabana, president of the Bogotá Journalists’ Association (CPB), and later served as Colombia’s Ambassador to the Holy See.
In 2007, he was appointed Presidential Press Secretary, becoming one of the principal public spokespersons for the Uribe administration during a period marked by intense institutional conflict between the Executive Branch and Colombia’s Supreme Court of Justice.
The DAS Illegal Wiretapping Scandal
Velásquez’s name became closely associated with one of Colombia’s most significant political scandals: the illegal surveillance operations carried out by the now-defunct Department of Administrative Security (DAS).
Judicial investigations established that the DAS conducted unlawful wiretapping, surveillance, and intelligence operations targeting Supreme Court justices, journalists, opposition politicians, and human rights defenders. The scandal led to numerous criminal investigations and convictions involving intelligence officials and other public servants.
Within that context, prosecutors investigated the roles of several senior presidential officials, including César Mauricio Velásquez and Presidential Legal Secretary Edmundo del Castillo.
Criminal Conviction
After more than fifteen years of judicial proceedings, Colombia’s Superior Tribunal of Bogotá overturned an earlier acquittal and convicted both officials of criminal conspiracy (concierto para delinquir).
On December 3, 2024, a panel of the Supreme Court of Justice of Colombia upheld the convictions and confirmed prison sentences of 63 months for both Velásquez and Del Castillo.
According to the Court’s ruling, they participated in a scheme designed to undermine the credibility of Supreme Court magistrates by using information obtained through illegal intelligence activities connected to the DAS surveillance program.
A Government Marked by Controversy
During Velásquez’s tenure as Presidential Press Secretary, the Uribe administration faced several major national controversies, including the DAS illegal wiretapping scandal, the “parapolitics” investigations, the “Yidispolítica” corruption case, and the extrajudicial killings widely known as the “false positives” scandal.
These were separate legal matters. Velásquez’s criminal conviction is specifically related to the DAS wiretapping case and not to the false positives investigations.
Is he using graduates from Unisabana for keep doing his crimes?
Nobody said nothing and he keeps influencing people around the world
Current Legal Status
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, Colombian judicial authorities are responsible for enforcing the sentence in accordance with Colombian law and applicable international judicial cooperation mechanisms if necessary.
The case continues to be viewed as one of the most significant legal outcomes arising from the DAS scandal. It has also fueled public debate about government accountability, judicial independence, and the effective enforcement of criminal judgments against former high-ranking public officials.
The execution of criminal sentences is a fundamental element of the rule of law. As with any convicted individual, it is ultimately the responsibility of the competent judicial authorities to ensure that a final sentence is carried out through the legal procedures established by Colombian and international law.
César Mauricio Velásquez: A DAS-Related Conviction and a New Complaint Seeking Investigation
By Investigative Desk
From the Presidential Office to a Criminal Conviction
César Mauricio Velásquez went from being one of the most influential communications officials in former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez’s administration to becoming one of the former officials convicted in connection with the scandal involving illegal operations by Colombia’s former intelligence agency, the Administrative Department of Security (DAS).
Velásquez, a journalist and academic, served as Presidential Press Secretary from 2007 to 2010. Before joining the Presidential Palace, he was Dean of the School of Communication at Universidad de La Sabana and built a career in journalism and higher education. He later served as Colombia’s Ambassador to the Holy See.
During his time in government, Colombia experienced a period of intense political and institutional controversy, particularly due to tensions between sectors of the Executive Branch and the Supreme Court of Justice.
The DAS Illegal Surveillance Case
The criminal case against Velásquez is related to the DAS scandal, in which Colombia’s intelligence agency was accused of carrying out illegal wiretapping, surveillance operations, and campaigns aimed at discrediting Supreme Court justices, journalists, human rights defenders, and political opponents.
Colombian courts determined that César Mauricio Velásquez and Edmundo del Castillo had criminal responsibility in relation to actions aimed at damaging the reputation of Supreme Court magistrates during a period in which the Court was investigating sensitive political corruption cases.
On December 3, 2024, the Supreme Court of Justice of Colombia upheld a sentence of 63 months in prison against Velásquez and Del Castillo for the crime of criminal conspiracy (concierto para delinquir).
New Allegations and Request for Investigation
In this context, Juan Pablo Domínguez states that he has been the victim of a series of events that, according to his complaint, may represent patterns of intimidation, harassment, professional retaliation, and the use of pressure mechanisms similar to those described in other cases involving abuse of power.
Domínguez states that he possesses documents, communications, and other evidence that, according to his account, could demonstrate a coordinated campaign of harassment against him.
These allegations require independent investigation by competent authorities in order to determine:
- whether criminal conduct occurred;
- who may be responsible;
- whether there was coordination among different actors;
- and whether the alleged events could involve crimes such as threats, coercion, abuse of authority, human trafficking-related conduct, or other violations under national and international law.
At this stage, any responsibility beyond the conviction related to the DAS case must be established through independent legal proceedings.
The Question of Sentence Enforcement
The confirmation of a criminal sentence has also generated public debate regarding the effectiveness of justice systems in ensuring that court decisions are enforced, particularly when convicted individuals are outside the country.
Colombian judicial authorities are responsible for determining the legal mechanisms required to enforce a sentence, including international judicial cooperation procedures when applicable.
The case of César Mauricio Velásquez remains part of the broader discussion regarding limits on government power, accountability of senior public officials, and the obligation to guarantee access to justice for individuals who claim to have suffered abuses.
A Complaint Seeking National and International Review
The testimony of individuals who claim to have been affected by powerful institutions or individuals must be evaluated through formal legal mechanisms, including prosecutors’ offices, courts, international cooperation channels, and human rights institutions.
The central question is whether the reported events represent isolated personal disputes or whether they require a broader investigation into possible patterns of abuse, intimidation, or misuse of influence.
A transparent judicial process, supported by evidence and due process guarantees, is the mechanism required to determine responsibility and protect the rights of all parties involved.