In February, August and October 2005, the defendant acted as the Consul of Colombia in Tulcán, Ecuador.
An application for visa, dated 13 July 2005, signed by the defendant, was addressed to the coordinator of visas and immigration of the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Colombia. Therewith, the defendant endorsed the request of the applicant (Chinese foreigner), ascertaining he had personally interviewed him at the Consulate of Colombia in Tulcán. The defendant noted in his observations that the alleged interviewee had “manifested his intent of staying legally in Colombia, with his family”. Yet, it was proven that said individual had never left his home country, China (confirmation by the Administrative Security Services (Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad)). Similar proceedings, in similar circumstances, were followed in respect of a Chinese female foreigner. The visa application was dated 15 September 2005. Other five equivalent instances of facilitation of illegal entry and stay of Chinese nationals were determined. The documents issued by the defendant informed the authorization later issued by the public officer in charge for the issuing of visas in the Ministry of Foreign Relations of Colombia.
The seven Chinese nationals entered Colombia illegally by failing to comply with the legal requisites determined by law to the effect.
In ascertaining the facts, authorities relied much on documental evidence.
The defendant was convicted of falsification of official document, procedural fraud and migrant smuggling. He was sentenced to 13 years’ imprisonment.
For further details see “Procedural History” and “Commentary”.
Seven years interdiction to the exercise of public functions or office (overall penalty re all convictions)
NOTE: The defendant was sentenced to (i) 130 months’ imprisonment for migrant smuggling, (ii) 66 months’ imprisonment for falsification of official document, and (iii) 91 months’ imprisonment for procedural fraud. The final and overall sentence determined in line with the doctrine of real concurrence of offences was 13 years’ imprisonment
Consul of Colombia in Tulcán, Ecuador.The Defence argued inter alia that no evidence was available demonstrating the defendant had perceived a financial or other material benefit. In such circumstances, the crime of migrant smuggling could not be deemed perpetrated