Councillors confirm suspension of Tunja

The Attorney General's Office confirmed the sanction of suspension in the exercise of the office for a term of three months all the councilors of Tunja after finding that the election of the ombudsman of this city, in 2008, did not conform to majorities indicated by the Law
 
Councillors who have ratified the decision are: Nestor Alvarado Barrero, Lifan Camacho Mauricio Molano, Edgar Fernando Amézquita Pedraza, Jose Antonio Estupiñán Caceres, Marlen Fort Faustino, Luis Moreno Fúneme, José Miguel Garay Barrera, Jorge Armando Cómbita Garay, Juan Antonio Torres Garay, Nelson Enrique Farias Martinez, Fabio Armando Martinez Villamil, Franchesco Geovanny Lozano Ospina, Diana Paola Rodriguez Robles, Pedro Pablo Salas Hernandez, Omar Munoz Jose Sanabria, Javier Sierra Nixon Mendieta, and Calos Cow July Bohorquez.

The facts relating to the election of Mr. Joseph Prisciliano Arias Arias, acting on behalf of Tunja on 10 January 2008, with an 8 votes, when in accordance with the Constitution and Articles 29 and 30 of Act 136 of 1994 , the minimum required was 9.

In resolving the appeal, the Second Deputy Attorney General for Administrative Supervision noted that the deficiency resulted in the violation of the concept of majority established by law "because it sets the condition is clear, be essential that it be chosen by most participants. "

The prosecution said that in this case fully demonstrated that the choice of ombudsman was not with the number of votes required, "where evidence arises which violated the provisions be addressed, and no records of those who were left disagree ", which was essential to demonstrate that departed from the decision illegal, why everyone involved in that vote are creditors to the sanction given by not acting with due diligence and care.

For the office is shown that those interested could leave the records and the qualifications they deemed necessary to oppose or disagree with the choice that was done illegally, while not required to comply with the vote but did not and to an act of such importance prudence and good judgment that was recommended to verify compliance with the required majority vote, a situation that happened not so attached to them a lack of diligence, attention and care in carrying out such a vote.