Samper Presidency Ends, but Funds Scandal Far From Over

Although Ernesto Samper’s term as president has come to an end, his scandal-plagued legacy lives on in a court case that judicial officials warn could drag on for years.

Colombia’s Constitutional Court is investigating charges that 110 members of Congress who voted against impeaching Samper neglected their duty. The case stems from a congressional vote two years ago at the height of a movement to throw Samper out of office because of a campaign finance scandal.

At that time, the manager and treasurer of Samper’s 1994 presidential campaign were already in jail and had confessed that drug traffickers had contributed $6 million to the coffers. Guillermo Pallomari, accountant for the Cali cartel, had been arrested carrying a suitcase full of documents showing that his bosses had financed Samper’s campaign along with those of several members of Congress.

Congress, dominated by Samper’s Liberal Party, opened an investigation into the president’s conduct. After a tense, televised debate, they voted 111-43 that there was not enough evidence to impeach him. One member of Congress who voted to exonerate Samper has since died.

Still, a group of citizens who watched the debate remained convinced that there was enough evidence. Led by respected jurist and Samper foe Enrique Parejo, they filed suit in the Constitutional Court accusing those who favored Samper of neglecting their duty, a crime that carries a jail sentence of three to eight years.

In June--five days after Samper’s handpicked successor lost to Andres Pastrana, who was inaugurated as president Friday--the court decided that there was enough evidence to open a formal investigation into the matter and began subpoenaing the 110 members of the 1996 session of Congress to testify.

“I think it is highly suspicious that the court waited to begin the investigation until they knew who was going to govern,” said Sen. Carlos Alonso Lucio, who was in the lower Chamber of Representatives during the proceedings two years ago and spoke eloquently against impeaching Samper.

The accused are presenting a joint defense headed by five well-known constitutional and criminal lawyers. Lucio filed his own suit, accusing the court of violating the constitution by interfering with another branch of government and, specifically, calling lawmakers to account for their votes.

The defense strategy includes:

* Asserting that the Samper case has already been tried and that the new investigation is a reopening of the same incident.

* Claiming that there was not evidence or proof that allowed them to impeach the former president.

* Coordinating testimony to avoid giving contradictory statements.

“They are trying to pull off a coup d’etat by one branch of government against another,” Lucio said of the court.

Many Colombians believe that Samper himself undermined his congressional supporters’ case last month by admitting to the new session of Congress that narco-money had indeed entered his campaign, although he denied knowing about it at the time.

Parejo’s Citizens Follow-Up Committee plans to present more evidence next week against Samper’s defenders. They have compiled a list of government financing for public works in the districts whose representatives voted to find Samper blameless.

“This demonstrates that members of Congress who voted for exoneration received far more money than their districts normally get,” Parejo charged.

“What occurred in the Chamber [of Representatives] in 1996 was the bankruptcy of the administration of justice,” he said. “It was a terrible precedent for the stability of our country’s institutions. . . . Otherwise, it will go unpunished.”

* NEW LEADER SWORN IN: A12