According to the Political Constitution of Colombia, in its Article 135, the motion of censure is the debate that takes place in the Chambers that make up the national parliament, regarding improper or questionable actions of ministers, superintendents, and directors of administrative departments, “for matters related to the functions proper to the office, or for failure to comply with the requests and summons of the Congress of the Republic.”.
Colombia's history has been tainted by corruption and drug trafficking. These continue to be the burden of a nationality that carries in its DNA the sweat of the fields, the pain of war, and the endeavor to achieve development in its way of life. However, the shadow of these scourges always ignites the flame and burns up every attempt at survival for the common, hardworking Colombian.
A new corruption scandal is tarnishing the country. New debates, clashes, accusations, and lost money are gracing the headlines of major national and international media outlets. Once again, Colombia is starring in a corrupt event, a grand and painful one.
The most important discussion in the national parliament at the moment centers on a potential motion of no confidence against the Minister of ICT, Karen Abudinen, who until now had been standing firm and defending her position in the technology portfolio. However, with the news that the country woke up to today – that President Iván Duque asked for her resignation yesterday – we await the official announcement of her departure.
Iván Duque is nearing the end of his term as the youngest president in Colombian history, an administration marked by social protests, an illness that disrupted his government plans and added to the country's existing problems, and, as if that weren't enough, the loss of 70 billion pesos in a contract intended to provide connectivity to rural schools in Colombia. Media outlets report he will now be in charge of the project that will benefit these educational spaces, as the money has yet to reappear and investigations are just beginning.
Although Duque came into office undefeated with corruption problems of this magnitude during his administration, this is the ninth time a minister in his cabinet has faced a no-confidence vote. More recently, the government coalition demonstrated it had the majorities in the last two motions faced by the Minister of Defense, Diego Molano, over the actions of the National Police during the most recent national strike.
However, this is not new in the country. Several ministers and leaders in administrations prior to Duque's have had to resign in the face of no-confidence votes filed against them. Before any political punishment, which condemns their careers and buries their reputations forever, all have preferred to resign from their positions. Three of the most emblematic and remembered cases have been the following:
- Guillermo Botero Nieto. He was the Minister of Defense for President Iván Duque from 2018 to 2019. The first no-confidence vote was filed against him in June 2019. At that time, the opposition bloc argued that he was not fulfilling some of the duties assigned to his position: 121 representatives rejected the motion, and only 20 voted for his removal from the cabinet.
However, five months later, in November 2019, he faced another no-confidence motion. This time, the most significant accusation attributed responsibility to him in a military bombing of an FARC dissident camp, where several minors were found dead. As the votes in favor of his political censure began to turn against him, he decided to resign from his position as minister.
- Néstor Humberto Martínez. He served as Minister of the Interior under President Andrés Pastrana from 1998–2000. At that time, he resigned before Congress voted on a motion of no confidence against him. He did so minutes before the parliamentarians began the session. “My departure is made indispensable to prevent me from being judged by those who, from the perspective of their own interests, consider the possibility of dreaming of a different country that breaks with the vices of the past to be censurable,” were Martínez's words at the time, according to El Tiempo's records.
- Fernando Londoño. He was Minister of the Interior and Justice for two years during Álvaro Uribe's first term. He resigned from his post before a vote of no confidence in 2003. At that time, he was implicated in the irregular purchase of shares in the firm Invercolsa.
Revista Semana published an interesting article on May 28th. In it, the publication claims that the motion of no confidence, a mechanism applauded as one of the most significant advancements of the “91 Constitution for granting the Senate and the House the power to dismiss ministers, has proven to be a useless tool, as it ”only serves as a showcase for the opposition and even as a pretext for government caucuses to try to snag some additional bureaucratic slice.".
It is supposed, and constitutional theory states, that the motion of no confidence is one of the guarantees that the system of checks and balances, necessary for the autonomy of powers and their functions, is fulfilled in a parliamentary democracy. Political, governmental, fiscal, and administrative entities in the country have used it, but when it seems to achieve its purpose, the accused plays their last card and resigns: in this way, they remain “undefeated” and with permission for other moves within the political spectrum. When this has not happened, it is because parliamentary majorities avoid their punishment.
At the end of last year, Senator Richard Aguilar and Representative César Lorduy promoted a bill so that officials facing a motion of no-confidence debate cannot resign before the vote. The idea was that if the minister resigns, the resignation would be accepted after the motion. The proposal did not advance and was shelved in 2019. However, Aguilar reintroduced the bill in 2020, and it is currently awaiting a second debate.