Bogotá Court rejects Carlos Caicedo's appeal in Santa Marta parks case
The Criminal Division of the Bogotá High Court declared inadmissible the appeal filed by former mayor Carlos Caicedo, who sought additional time for his defence in the trial concerning park contracts.
Court denies Caicedo's appeal: he must resort to ordinary procedural remedies
The Criminal Division of the Bogotá High Court rejected as inadmissible the constitutional appeal filed by former Santa Marta mayor and former Magdalena governor Carlos Caicedo Omar, according to ifmnoticias.com. With this action, the defendant sought to resume the closing arguments hearing within the criminal proceedings related to park contracts entered into in 2015.
The decision was made with the report of magistrate Ramiro Riaño Riaño and was directed against the Ninth Criminal Court of the Circuit with Jurisdiction in Bogotá, the office handling the trial.
What Caicedo requested and how the Court responded
Caicedo requested that the closing arguments hearing of 1 October be reopened and that he be granted reasonable time to complete his submission. He argued that the judge set a time for arguments without clarifying that it had to be shared with his lawyer, that she subsequently granted him only ten additional minutes for his personal defence—which the accused exercises directly—that she interrupted him on several occasions, and that she did not allow him to project images of the works.
According to the Court's account, the defence lawyer intervened for just over an hour, whilst Caicedo spoke for approximately 21 minutes, including interruptions.
The central argument of the Division was the principle of subsidiarity: an appeal cannot serve to replace ordinary remedies available within a proceeding. The former official can allege a nullity for violation of the right to defence, set out in article 457 of Law 906 of 2004, and, if convicted, appeal and even resort to cassation before the Supreme Court.
The Court also noted that the law—article 444 of the same code—grants the judge the power to set the maximum duration of arguments, provided that this is done reasonably. The Division indicated that it found no evident restriction on the right to defence, given that the parties accepted the established limit and no essential argument was identified that remained unexpressed.
Positions of the other parties
In the appeal proceedings, the court denied having violated fundamental rights. The Public Prosecutor stated that the duration of arguments was accepted by the parties. The District of Santa Marta, which acts as the victim within the proceeding, requested that the appeal be declared inadmissible. Judicial Criminal Ombudsman's Office 241 found no violation either.
If the decision is not appealed, the file will be sent to the Constitutional Court for possible review.
The Santa Marta parks case
In this trial, Caicedo is prosecuted for the crime of contract without compliance with legal requirements, related to Public Tender 011 of 2014 and contracts 390 and 413 of 2015, intended for the recovery of parks in Santa Marta. According to the Public Prosecutor, the project increased from five to 16 parks and its value rose from approximately 6,000 million to more than 19,000 million pesos.
At the 1 October hearing, the Public Prosecutor and the representation of Santa Marta's Municipal Government requested a conviction. The defence requested acquittal and argued that all works were executed in accordance with the law. The judge has not yet announced the verdict, so Caicedo maintains the presumption of innocence in this case.
Second case: conviction for health centres pending appeal
The former governor separately faces the case concerning the health centres of the ESE Alejandro Próspero Reverend. In July 2026 he was convicted at first instance to 9 years and 9 months in prison for contract without compliance with legal requirements and misappropriation through embezzlement, related to maintenance works at five health centres that remained unfinished.
That decision is not final: his defence appealed it before the Bogotá High Court, announced petitions for nullity, and Caicedo remains at liberty whilst the appeals are resolved.
Source: Google News CO — Bogotá