A list of names marked for assassination, found in his possession, years before the murder
En Colombia, la justicia ha vuelto a pronunciarse sobre uno de los casos más cargados de simbolismo político del país: el Tribunal de Antioquia revocó la absolución de Santiago Uribe Vélez y lo condenó a 28 años de prisión por homicidio agravado y concierto para delinquir, en relación con el grupo paramilitar conocido como Los 12 Apóstoles. La decisión descansa sobre testimonios que un tribunal anterior había desestimado, recordándonos que la verdad judicial no siempre emerge en el primer intento, sino que a veces requiere que otra mirada, más paciente o más valiente, vuelva sobre las mismas pruebas. El caso, que lleva el apellido de un expresidente y las huellas de víctimas sin nombre propio en los titulares, plantea preguntas que Colombia lleva décadas intentando responder sobre el poder, la impunidad y el precio de la violencia organizada.
- Un tribunal de apelaciones en Antioquia anuló una absolución previa y condenó a Santiago Uribe Vélez a 28 años de cárcel, sacudiendo un caso que muchos creían cerrado.
- Cuatro testimonios antes ignorados o minimizados se convirtieron en el eje del fallo, incluido el de un participante directo en el asesinato de Camilo Barrientos, quien señaló a Uribe como el cerebro de la operación.
- Una lista de personas marcadas para ser asesinadas, hallada en poder de Santiago Uribe y que incluía el nombre de la víctima, reforzó la tesis de una conspiración criminal organizada y no de actos aislados.
- El expresidente Álvaro Uribe reaccionó con una escueta publicación en redes sociales expresando dolor personal, mientras la defensa de su hermano ya anunció que llevará el caso ante la Corte Suprema de Justicia.
- La condena permanece en pie por ahora, pero el proceso judicial aún no ha concluido: la última palabra la tendrá el máximo tribunal del país.
Un tribunal colombiano dio un giro decisivo al condenar a Santiago Uribe Vélez —hermano del expresidente Álvaro Uribe— a 28 años de prisión por homicidio agravado y concierto para delinquir. El Tribunal de Antioquia revocó la absolución que había dictado el juzgado de primera instancia, apoyándose en cuatro testimonios que la instancia anterior había descartado o valorado de manera insuficiente.
El relato más contundente fue el de Juan Carlos Meneses Quintero, quien participó en la planeación y ejecución del asesinato de Camilo Barrientos y declaró que Santiago Uribe había dirigido personalmente la preparación del crimen. A ese testimonio se sumó una prueba documental de peso: una lista de personas señaladas para ser eliminadas, encontrada en poder de Uribe, en la que figuraba el nombre de Barrientos y que había sido registrada antes de que Meneses rindiera su declaración. Para el tribunal, ese conjunto de evidencias dibujaba no actos esporádicos, sino una empresa criminal deliberada, supuestamente coordinada desde La Carolina, una finca rural en Yarumal.
El grupo en cuestión, Los 12 Apóstoles, habría llevado a cabo una campaña de ejecuciones extrajudiciales bajo el eufemismo de la limpieza social. El fallo de apelación rechazó la lógica de la duda razonable que había sostenido la absolución original y concluyó que las pruebas, valoradas en su conjunto, establecían con claridad el papel de Santiago Uribe en la organización de esa estructura criminal.
Cuando la sentencia se hizo pública el 25 de noviembre, el expresidente Álvaro Uribe publicó en X una frase breve y sin argumentos jurídicos: "Siento profundo dolor por la condena a mi hermano. Que Dios nos ayude." La defensa, por su parte, ya anunció que recurrirá ante la Corte Suprema de Justicia, donde el debate sobre el peso de las pruebas tendrá una última oportunidad de resolverse.
A Colombian court has reversed its earlier decision to acquit Santiago Uribe Vélez, the brother of former president Álvaro Uribe, and instead sentenced him to 28 years in prison. The Antioquia Court's ruling on Tuesday found him guilty of aggravated homicide and criminal conspiracy in connection with a vigilante group called Los 12 Apóstoles—the Twelve Apostles—which prosecutors say carried out a campaign of extrajudicial killings disguised as social cleansing.
The reversal hinged on four witness testimonies that the original trial court had dismissed or given little weight to. The appellate tribunal reconsidered this evidence and found it credible enough to overturn the acquittal entirely. One of the most damaging accounts came from Juan Carlos Meneses Quintero, a man who participated in the planning and execution of the murder of Camilo Barrientos. Meneses testified that Santiago Uribe himself had directed the preparation and conceived the plan to kill Barrientos. This testimony, which had been sidelined in the first trial, became central to the appellate court's reasoning.
Equally significant was physical evidence: a list of names marked for assassination that was found in Santiago Uribe's possession. Camilo Barrientos's name appeared on that list, and the list had been documented years before Meneses gave his account to authorities. The court interpreted this as proof of a deliberate, organized conspiracy rather than isolated incidents. The operations themselves were allegedly coordinated from La Carolina, a rural estate in Yarumal, in the Antioquia region.
The appellate court's decision represents a substantial reassessment of the case. The original judgment had excluded key evidence and relied on reasonable doubt to acquit. The higher court rejected that reasoning, finding instead that the witness accounts and documentary evidence painted a clear picture of Santiago Uribe's role in organizing a criminal enterprise that killed multiple people under the guise of vigilante justice.
When the verdict became public on November 25th, former president Álvaro Uribe responded through social media. "I feel profound pain at the sentence against my brother," he wrote on X. "May God help us." His statement was brief and personal, offering no legal commentary or defense of the charges.
Santiago Uribe's legal team has already signaled its intention to appeal the conviction to Colombia's Supreme Court, the nation's highest judicial authority. The case will now move into that final appellate stage, where the question of whether the evidence truly supports the 28-year sentence will be litigated once more. For now, the reversal stands as a reminder that even acquittals in high-profile cases can be overturned when appellate courts find reason to reconsider the weight of evidence that lower courts had dismissed.
Notable Quotes
The preparation and the initiative were in charge of Santiago Uribe Vélez— Juan Carlos Meneses Quintero, participant in the murder of Camilo Barrientos
I feel profound pain at the sentence against my brother. May God help us.— Former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez, on social media
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did the court reverse an acquittal rather than simply uphold it? Doesn't that seem unusual?
It is unusual, but Colombian law allows appellate courts to review the entire record and reach different conclusions about evidence. The original judge had essentially said the prosecution hadn't proven its case. The appellate court looked at the same evidence—especially the witness testimony—and said actually, it does prove the case.
What changed between the two trials?
Nothing changed in the facts themselves. What changed was how the evidence was weighed. The first court had dismissed or minimized four key testimonies. The appellate court gave those testimonies full credibility, particularly the account from someone who was actually involved in the murder.
The kill list seems like the smoking gun here.
It is. A list with the victim's name on it, in his possession, years before the murder—that's not circumstantial in the way other evidence might be. It suggests planning, intent, organization. It transforms the case from isolated violence into conspiracy.
Does this conviction stick, or is there a real chance the Supreme Court reverses it again?
The Supreme Court could reverse it, but the appellate court's reasoning is solid. They've built the case on witness testimony from someone inside the conspiracy and physical evidence of premeditation. The Supreme Court would have to find serious legal error to overturn it.
What does this mean for the former president?
Legally, nothing directly. But politically and personally, it's significant. His brother is now a convicted murderer. The family's reputation, already complicated by other legal troubles, takes another hit. His statement—that brief message about pain—suggests he understands the weight of it.