Listen to the article
In a remarkable turn of events that has shaken Colombia’s judicial establishment, the president of the Constitutional Court, Jorge Enrique Ibañez, has been legally compelled to withdraw false allegations that his extramarital child was conceived through sexual abuse.
The high-profile controversy erupted when Ibañez made these serious accusations during an interview with news outlet Casa Macondo. The publication was investigating the disappearance of court documents that confirmed the existence of the magistrate’s child born outside his marriage.
During the investigation, Ibañez claimed he had been victimized by the mother of his child, stating, “My paternity appears as a consequence of conduct of which I was a victim… of sexual abuse by a woman… because the mother of that young man is about 10 or 15 years older than me.” The magistrate further alleged that the woman had stalked him and that he “probably ended up in a defenseless situation where I could have had a relationship with her.”
These allegations quickly unraveled under scrutiny. A judge overseeing the resulting criminal case determined that Ibañez’s published statements violated the mother’s constitutional rights to honor and good name. In a significant rebuke to one of Colombia’s highest judicial authorities, the court ordered Ibañez to formally retract his statements through the same media outlet that had published the original claims.
The controversy has deep roots, stretching back decades to when the child first claimed Ibañez as his father. In 2002, the young man filed a paternity lawsuit seeking formal recognition. Ibañez initially denied being the father and refused to undergo DNA testing until a court mandated his compliance in 2003.
The subsequent DNA results left little room for doubt, establishing Ibañez’s paternity with more than 99.99% certainty. Despite this conclusive evidence, the magistrate continued to cast doubt on his relationship to the child. In an August interview with Casa Macondo, Ibañez suggested that “it was likely that the DNA evidence was false,” further fueling the controversy.
Casa Macondo’s investigation revealed additional inconsistencies in Ibañez’s account. The publication discovered that the mother was only six years older than Ibañez, not the “10 to 15 years” he had claimed—a finding that further undermined his narrative.
The situation escalated in October when Ibañez doubled down on his claims in a follow-up interview with Casa Macondo, reiterating allegations of being drugged and sexually abused. These statements prompted the mother to file criminal charges against the high-ranking judicial officer.
The case has raised serious questions about accountability within Colombia’s judicial system, particularly concerning those who hold positions of significant authority. Legal experts note that false accusations of this nature from a figure as prominent as the Constitutional Court president could have far-reaching implications for public trust in the judiciary.
This controversy comes at a sensitive time for Colombia’s courts, which have been working to restore public confidence following several high-profile scandals in recent years. The incident highlights the tension between personal accountability and professional responsibility for those entrusted with upholding the nation’s constitutional order.
As the legal proceedings continue, observers are closely watching how this unprecedented situation involving one of the country’s top judicial authorities will affect institutional credibility and whether it will lead to broader reforms in how judicial misconduct is addressed within Colombia’s legal system.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
10 Comments
Wow, this is a shocking abuse of power by a high-ranking judge. Falsely accusing the mother of his child of sexual assault is a despicable attempt to deflect from his own extramarital affair. The courts were right to force him to retract those false statements.
This is a deeply troubling case. A high-ranking judge making false allegations of sexual abuse against the mother of his child is a shocking abuse of power and an attempt to deflect from his own wrongdoing. The courts were right to force him to retract those statements.
Absolutely, this is a clear misuse of his position and authority. He should be held fully accountable for these false claims.
This is a very troubling case. The Constitutional Court president’s false accusations against the mother of his child are completely unacceptable. Falsely claiming sexual abuse is a serious abuse of power and an attempt to cover up his own infidelity. I hope the courts hold him fully accountable.
The Constitutional Court president’s actions are completely outrageous. Falsely accusing the mother of his child of sexual abuse in order to cover up his own infidelity is a gross abuse of power and a violation of her rights. I hope he faces serious consequences for this.
This is a shocking abuse of power by a high-ranking judge. Falsely claiming the mother of his child was guilty of sexual assault is a despicable attempt to deflect from his own wrongdoing. The courts were right to force him to retract those false statements.
Agreed, this is a clear violation of the mother’s rights and a gross misuse of the president’s position and authority.
The Constitutional Court president’s actions in this case are completely unacceptable. Falsely accusing the mother of his child of sexual assault is an egregious abuse of power and an attempt to cover up his own infidelity. I hope he faces serious consequences for this.
The Constitutional Court president’s actions in this case are completely outrageous. Falsely accusing the mother of his child of sexual abuse is an appalling abuse of power and an attempt to cover up his own infidelity. I hope he faces serious consequences for this.
This is a deeply troubling case. A high-ranking judge making false allegations of sexual assault against the mother of his child is a shocking abuse of power and an attempt to deflect from his own wrongdoing. The courts were right to force him to retract those statements.