A member of the Colombian Communist Party has been reported to authorities for terrorism after calling for a campaign to make Colombia “unlivable” for Abelardo De La Espriella. The legal action follows a viral video in which the party militant urged supporters to target De La Espriella, sparking a wider political conflict between the party’s youth wing and Colombian conservatives.
Abelardo De La Espriella is the target of the reported threats. According to reports from Revista Semana, the complaint centers on a video released by a political secretary of the Juco (the youth wing of the Colombian Communist Party), which called for collective action to isolate and harass the lawyer within the country.
The incident has drawn reactions from international observers and domestic political leaders. The United States government has reportedly monitored the situation, while members of the Colombian Congress and victims’ families have called for the condemnation of the rhetoric, citing the historical context of political violence in Colombia.
Why was the Communist Party militant reported for terrorism?
The criminal complaint was filed after a video surfaced featuring a spokesperson for the Juco. In the recording, the militant explicitly called for a movement to make the country “invivible” (unlivable) for Abelardo De La Espriella. Under Colombian law, inciting violence or promoting actions that destabilize public order can be categorized under terrorism or instigation to commit a crime, depending on the specific legal framework applied by the Prosecutor’s Office.
According to other local outlets, the rhetoric used in the video is viewed by critics not as political dissent, but as a direct threat to the physical and professional integrity of the lawyer. The complaint argues that calling for a coordinated effort to make a citizen’s life “unlivable” crosses the line from free speech into the realm of criminal intimidation.
The Juco has been a focal point for radical left-wing activism in Colombia. This specific call to action has reignited tensions with “Uribismo”—the political movement following former President Álvaro Uribe—whose supporters often align with De La Espriella’s legal and political perspectives.
How have political leaders and families responded?
The controversy extended beyond the legal filing. The father of Luis Andrés Colmenares has publicly intervened. According to Infobae, Colmenares’ father requested that Iván Cepeda, a prominent left-wing figure, explicitly reject the comments made by the Communist Party spokesperson.
This request highlights the complexity of the Colombian political landscape, where victims of different tragedies often find themselves aligned with opposing political poles. By asking Cepeda to condemn the video, the Colmenares family sought to decouple the pursuit of justice from the promotion of political violence.
Iván Cepeda and other members of the political left have faced pressure to distance themselves from the Juco’s rhetoric. While the Communist Party maintains its right to political struggle, the specific targeting of an individual to make their life “unlivable” has been characterized by opponents as a “reivindicación de la violencia” (vindication of violence), a term used by Revista Semana to describe the trend of justifying aggression for ideological ends.
What is the international and domestic impact of the threats?
The United States government has reportedly responded to the video, reflecting the sensitivity of the U.S. to political stability and the rule of law in Colombia. According to El Tiempo, the U.S. response underscores the concern that such rhetoric could embolden illegal armed groups or lead to an escalation of urban political conflict.
Domestically, the clash is framed as a “pulso” (tug-of-war) between the radical left and the right-wing establishment. La Silla Vacía reports that the incident serves as a barometer for the current state of polarization in Colombia, where legal battles are frequently fought in the court of public opinion and through social media campaigns before they reach a judge.
The impact on the legal profession is also significant. De La Espriella is a polarizing figure, but legal associations in Colombia have historically emphasized that threats against lawyers—regardless of their political leanings—threaten the independence of the judicial system. If a lawyer can be targeted for their client list or political opinions, it creates a chilling effect on the right to defense.
Comparison of Perspectives on the Juco Video
The interpretation of the video varies significantly across the Colombian political spectrum:
- The Accusers: View the call to make the country “unlivable” as a clear act of terrorism and a precursor to physical violence, requiring immediate criminal prosecution.
- The Juco/Communist Party: Typically frame such calls as “political struggle” or “social pressure” against figures they perceive as defenders of the oppressive status quo.
- Moderate Political Figures: Such as Iván Cepeda, who are positioned between the need to support left-wing causes and the necessity of condemning rhetoric that mimics the violence of Colombia’s internal conflict.
This divide reflects the broader national struggle to transition from a history of armed conflict to a system of democratic disagreement. The use of the word “invivible” is the central point of contention; for some, it is a metaphor for social shunning, while for others, it is a coded invitation to violence.
The Colombian Prosecutor’s Office (Fiscalía General de la Nación) is the entity responsible for determining if the evidence in the video meets the legal threshold for terrorism or if the case will be handled as a lesser crime of threats or harassment. The outcome of this investigation will likely set a precedent for how “political struggle” is defined in the digital age in Colombia.
The next confirmed step in this process is the review of the evidence by the Prosecutor’s Office to determine if formal charges will be brought against the Juco militant. Updates on the legal status of the complaint are expected as the investigation progresses through the Colombian judicial system.
Do you believe political rhetoric should be legally penalized when it targets specific individuals? Share your thoughts in the comments below and share this article to join the conversation on political violence and free speech.