U.S. President Donald Trump has thrown his unconditional support behind Colombian hard-right presidential candidate Abelardo “El Tigre” de la Espriella, offering what he described as his “complete and total endorsement” ahead of the country’s June 21 runoff election.

The endorsement, published Tuesday evening on Trump’s Truth Social platform, immediately injected an international dimension into Colombia’s presidential race and marked a rare intervention by a sitting U.S. president in support of a candidate during an active electoral campaign.

The U.S. president went on to congratulate the Barranquilla-based lawyer on his first-round victory and expressed confidence that he would become Colombia’s next president. Trump also used the post to attack De la Espriella’s rival, left-wing senator Iván Cepeda, describing him as a “radical left-wing Marxist.”

Drawing parallels between MAGA (Make America Great Again), and “The Tiger’s” Defensores de la Patria (Defenders of the Homeland) movement, the two-term Republican leader stated the following:

“Abelardo de la Espriella, fights tirelessly for, and loves, his Great Country and People, just like I do for the United States of America.”

He then went on to claim: “As President, Abelardo would be tremendously successful in leading Colombia to Grow the Economy, Create Jobs, Promote Trade, Stop Illegal Immigration, Crack Down on Crime and Drugs, and Restore LAW AND ORDER! (…) “EL TIGRE” ABELARDO DE LA ESPRIELLA WILL NOT THE WONDERFUL PEOPLE OF COLOMBIA DOWN!”

The comments came less than three weeks before Colombians return to the polls to choose a successor to President Gustavo Petro, who is constitutionally barred from seeking reelection.

The runoff has emerged as one of the most polarized presidential contests in recent Colombian history, pitting firebrand De la Espriella, a political “outsider” who has campaigned on restoring security and strengthening ties with Washington, against Cepeda, a veteran senator and one of Petro’s closest political allies.

De la Espriella welcomed Trump’s endorsement, describing it as a sign of confidence in his vision for Colombia and its future relationship with the United States.

“President Trump has my deepest gratitude,” De la Espriella said in a statement following the endorsement.

The candidate has spent much of the campaign positioning himself as a staunch defender of free-market policies and a critic of Petro’s administration, which has faced mounting public dissatisfaction over security, corruption and economic management.

Trump’s endorsement follows months in which De la Espriella cultivated ties with conservative political figures in Washington. As his campaign gained momentum, he received backing from prominent Republican lawmakers including Florida Representative Maria Elvira Salazar and Ohio Senator Bernie Moreno, both influential allies of the U.S. president.

The support from Republican circles comes as Colombia remains one of Washington’s closest partners in Latin America. The two countries maintain extensive cooperation on trade, security, counternarcotics operations and migration issues.

Although U.S. administrations have traditionally avoided direct involvement in Colombian electoral politics, Trump’s endorsement places the White House squarely into the political conversation during the final stretch of the campaign.

Political analysts say the endorsement could resonate among some conservative voters while reinforcing De la Espriella’s efforts to present himself as the candidate most capable of rebuilding a close relationship with Washington.

President Gustavo Petro responded on social media without mentioning Trump by name, framing the issue as one of national sovereignty and warning against foreign influence in Colombia’s democratic process.

“When one country intervenes in the decisions of another country, freedom dies,” Petro wrote.

“I invite all Colombians to vote in complete freedom and not become slaves or a colony of anyone.”

The president also invoked Colombia’s independence heroes, writing that “an entire generation of young men and women of New Granada fought alongside Bolívar and Nariño to give us freedom and sovereignty.”

“If the heart of the world loses its freedom and sovereignty, the hope of the world and of Colombia is extinguished,” Petro added.

The exchange between U.S President Donald Trump and his Colombian counterpart adds a new layer of tension to an election campaign already marked by heightened political polarization and security concerns. The assassination of presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay in June last year shocked the nation and has revived memories of Colombia’s violent political past.

More than 41 million Colombians are eligible to vote in the June 21 election, including approximately 1.4 million citizens living abroad. Recent polling suggests a highly competitive race, although De la Espriella has gained momentum since emerging as the leading candidate in the first round.

The Colombian runoff is now attracting attention far beyond the country’s borders. Whether the U.S. president’s words manages to convince undecided voters in the center of the political spectrum, remains to be seem, but it has already ensured that the race between De la Espriella and Cepeda raises a high-stakes political gambit in Washington and Bogotá.

U.S. President Donald Trump has nominated Kentucky businessman and political ally Nathaniel “Nate” Morris to serve as the next U.S. ambassador to Colombia, placing a prominent supporter of the Republican president at the helm of one of Washington’s most important diplomatic posts in Latin America.

The nomination was formally submitted to lawmakers on Monday, one day after right-wing presidential candidate Abelardo “El Tigre” de la Espriella emerged as the frontrunner in Colombia’s first-round election, setting up a runoff that could reshape relations between Bogotá and Washington.

Morris, 45, is the founder of Rubicon Technologies, an environmental technology and waste-management company, and has become one of Trump’s most visible political allies in Kentucky. His nomination comes as Colombia enters a period of political transition and uncertainty over the future direction of bilateral cooperation on security, counternarcotics efforts, trade and migration.

The White House announced Morris’s nomination as part of a broader package of diplomatic appointments across Latin America. If confirmed by the Senate, he would become Washington’s top representative in Colombia at a pivotal moment for relations between the longtime allies.

Trump had previously urged Morris to abandon a potential bid for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky in order to join his administration.

“Nate is a fantastic businessman and a strong MAGA warrior,” Trump wrote on social media. “I have asked Nate to step aside from the Senate race to take a role in my Administration as Ambassador. Nate is Oxford-educated, tough as steel, loves our great nation, and will represent the United States very well.”

Although Morris has limited public diplomatic experience, his appointment reflects the Trump administration’s preference for politically connected allies and business leaders in several ambassadorial posts.

A native of Kentucky, Morris studied at George Washington University before pursuing further studies at the University of Oxford. He founded Rubicon Technologies, a company focused on waste management and environmental services, and later established Morris Industries, a private investment holding company based in Lexington with interests in sustainability, technology, industrial operations and financial services.

The nomination comes amid expectations that Colombia’s foreign policy could shift following Sunday’s election result. De la Espriella’s strong showing has fueled speculation that a future administration could seek closer alignment with Washington after years of tensions between the governments of President Donald Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro.

Before taking up the post in Bogotá, Morris must undergo Senate hearings and secure confirmation by a majority vote, a process that could take several weeks or months.

The results are starting to come in from around the country for the 2026 Colombian presidential election first round. Abelardo de la Espriella has outperformed expectations to win the first round with over ten million votes, facing Iván Cepeda in three weeks’ time 

The ballot boxes closed at 4pm for the 2026 Colombian presidential election first round and now the tallying up of votes is underway. So far, with 99% of the votes in (19:30), Abelardo de la Espriella is outperforming expectations and has won the first round. He was expected to win between 25-30% of the vote, but now stands at 43.74%, significantly exceeding those predictions.

Read more: Abelardo de la Espriella Candidate Guide

In second place by a whisker is Iván Cepeda of the ruling Pacto Democrático. He was widely expected to come first with 40-45% of the vote and that’s where he appears to be (40.91%). The good news is that he’s matched expectations and that he’s against the candidate he most wanted to face in the second round. The bad news is that he looks set to finish second, is right at the bottom end of his target vote share and Abelardo’s performance has put the tiger among the pigeons.

Read more: Iván Cepeda Candidate Guide

The big losers of the day seem set to be the centrists and Paloma Valencia. The former are below even the extremely modest predictions they had been given, while the latter is performing beyond her worst nightmares. She had been expected to get at least into double figures, but is languishing at under 7%.

Read more: Paloma Valencia Candidate Guide

This is only the preconteo, so the votes will be formalised and fully scrutinised later. However, there is rarely a big change between the two numbers. There will still be heavy scrutiny on the data, especially with the focus on impropriety and accusations of vote-rigging (see below).

Only Abelardo de la Espriella managed to cross the symbolic ten million vote barrier, with Cepeda over 300,000 off the mark. With around 11 million votes needed for victory in the second round, things look promising for the self-styled outsider candidate.

Abelardo de la Espriella had been gaining momentum steadily in the last few weeks, but this is still a turn-up for the books and an extraordinary result for him. There is some speculation that a share of his vote comes from Pacto supporters that would prefer a run-off with him against Cepeda, but this seems unfounded.

There have been reports of private transport being laid on for rural voters to get to stations, paid for by both Cepeda and de la Espriella supporters in different regions. Supporters of both those candidates have also been accused of campaigning on the day and so forth in various reports from around the nation.

The collapse in the Centro Democrático vote isn’t hard to understand: Paloma Valencia had run a poor campaign and failed to get traction in the final weeks. What is surprising is the sheer scale of it: she’s ten to 20 points behind where she had expected to be. Questions will be asked in the Centro Democrático head offices now.

Elsewhere in the election, the dominance of de la Espriella and Cepeda left little room for anyone else. Sergio Fajardo ended his political career with over a million votes and nearly 5% of the vote, not too far off Valencia in the end. Failed Bogotá mayor Claudia López only got a quarter of the way to the 932,000 votes needed to recover her deposit. Hilariously, that’s about half the votes she gained in March’s primaries.

López did manage to squeak ahead of the reprehensible Santiago Botero, arrested in Cartagena on the morning of the election on domestic abuse charges. No surprise from a candidate who had been promising bullets for delinquents. Spare a thought, though, for Gustavo Matamoros in last place with a shade over 5,000 votes.

Turnout was higher than normal at 57.86%, with voto en blanco outranking all but four candidates and winning over 400,000 votes. As predicted, the Pacto won both coasts, the outer Amazon/llanos and Bogotá, while the right won all the central areas outside the capital. Dig deeper and the picture changes a bit: only de la Espriella won for the right, and Pacto’s vote share while winning was lower than expected in many departments (and Bogotá).

What happens next in the 2026 Colombian presidential election?

This means we are looking at a second round run-off on June 21st between Iván Cepeda and Abelardo de la Espriella, the two most polarising candidates on the tarjetón today. Whichever one triumphs, Colombia will have a lot of unhappy voters. It’s easy to assume that Paloma voters will flock to de la Espriella, but that’s far from guaranteed, given the divisive nature of the candidate.

We are likely to be in coin flip territory at this point – de la Espriella won around 600,000 more votes today, which is a selnder advantage. The million voters for Fajardo should mainly go his way, but again that’s far from guaranteed. He is no longer in pole position, but also not out of the race. Both candidates have a lot of work to do now.

With a relatively high turnout this weekend, it’s unlikely that there is a well of voters that will come out only for the second round, something that Cepeda will be hoping for. However, there are millions of non-voters who could make the difference if either candidate wins them over.

There are likely to be increased attacks on the electoral system from both the president and Pacto Histórico supporters. Petro has spent months questioning its validity and claiming that the system is opaque and unclear. Today has already seen a flurry of similar comments flooding social media with claims of impropriety in various places.

Cédulas gemeleadas en anillos de corrupción en la registraduría. La señora tiene el derecho de elegir y se lo han conculcado.

Espero de la registraduria
Investigación a profundidad pic.twitter.com/8vmZDTYnVO

— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) May 31, 2026

Oversight is carried out by the CNE (Consejo Nacional Electoral). In order to do this over the vast territory and number of stations, over 800,000 citizens are selected to be vote-counters. This is similar to jury duty in other countries and is compensated with a day off as well as a compulsory day of training a couple of weeks beforehand. As the electorate is growing, there are now some 13,000 voting sites across the country, most with multiple voting tables – 122,000 in total for today’s elections.

Petro’s concerns rest on the fact that Thomas Greg and Sons handle the software used in the election system, a firm that he’s clashed with repeatedly, especially over Colombian passport printing. He says that the systems are opaque and he has not received answers from the CNE or Registraduria over various concerns he has. However, both groups, along with Colombia’s neutral election observers MOE have been clear about the processes.

Online, there are many posts claiming that a key part of the alleged fraud will be in the reports made by the jurados. This echoes previous elections, where there was a flurry of images purporting to show electoral forms (E-14) that had been altered by the vote-counters. With AI entering the scenario, expect more of this after the first round, especially if de la Espriella or Cepeda do badly.

US senator Bernie Moreno, Bogotá-born, is in Colombia to observe the voting process, along with a significant number of international observers. Their reports will come through in the coming week, but this is only part of the story. Much of the voting irregularities here are hard to prove and difficult for outsiders to properly scrutinise.

Petro will also be under a keen eye from the electoral authorities and watchdogs over his involvement in campagining. The president is supposed to keep neutral throughout the election of his successor, but Petro has at best ridden that line very closely. He’s been accused on multiple occasions of crossing it, too, as have his ministers and Cepeda himself.

Whatever happens in the coming three weeks, the Bogotá Post team will keep you up to date with unbiased local reporting, free from vested interests or paymasters. Stay tuned to find out what twists and turns are coming in the 2026 Colombian presidential election race, as well as detailed profiles on the two candidates left in the race.

The post 2026 Colombian Presidential elections round one results: de la Espriella and Cepeda are through appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Much of Colombia woke up to temperate weather and clear skies over the capital, Bogotá. As lines began to form outside polling stations when they opened at 8:00 a.m. on Sunday, voters cast their ballots in one of the country’s most closely watched presidential elections in decades, a contest that could redefine the political direction of the South American nation at a time of mounting security concerns and economic uncertainty.

In Bogotá, outside Corferias, the country’s largest exhibition and convention center and one of Colombia’s busiest voting locations, queues of unregistered voters formed well before polling stations officially opened.

According to the National Registry Office, more than 41 million Colombians are eligible to vote in the election, including approximately 1.4 million citizens residing abroad. Polling stations are under tight security nationwide and will remain open until 4:00 p.m. local time.

The 2026 election has been overshadowed by a resurgence of political violence, recalling memories of some of the country’s darkest electoral periods. Authorities have heightened security measures following a tense campaign season marked by threats against candidates, concerns over public safety, and growing polarization between the political left and right.

President Gustavo Petro, who is constitutionally barred from seeking re-election, has thrown his support behind left-wing senator Iván Cepeda, 63, who is widely regarded as the architect of the government’s failed “Total Peace” strategy aimed at negotiating disarmament agreements with FARC dissidents and other illegal armed groups.

President Petro cast his vote at 9:10 am from the Plazoleta Mosquera inside the National Capitol.

Opinion polls have placed Cepeda in first place with support ranging between 33% and 40%, making him the clear favorite to advance to a second-round runoff scheduled for June 21 should no candidate secure an outright majority of 50% plus one vote on Sunday.

Cepeda, of the ruling Historic Pact coalition, is facing two formidable opponents to his Marxist agenda: right-wing senator Paloma Valencia, 48, of the Centro Democrático party, and criminal defense lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella, 47, considered the “outsider” in the race, whose rapid rise has become one of the defining stories of the campaign.

Valencia and De la Espriella both embrace the “democratic security” doctrine associated with former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez, whose two administrations between 2002 and 2010 were defined by an aggressive military campaign against the FARC and ELN guerrillas.

De la Espriella, known among supporters as “The Tiger,” has portrayed himself as a political outsider capable of restoring economic growth and defeating criminal organizations. His campaign has gained momentum through a pro-Bukele message, fueled by a strong social media presence and rhetoric that resonates with middle-class Colombians on the Caribbean coast who are frustrated by extortion, insecurity, and the traditional political establishment.

The political capital of  Sergio Fajardo and Claudia López appears to be spent, as the race has increasingly evolved into a contest between three candidates. The self-professed centrists and former mayors – one from Medellín (Fajardo) and other from Bogotá (López) — have consistently polled in the single digits, but on Sunday, their political relevance could evaporate a quickly with the final tally.

Sunday’s vote is unlikely to produce an outright winner, making a runoff between Cepeda and one of his conservative challengers the most probable outcome.

The key uncertainty is whether Valencia’s established party machinery and her effort to capture the undecided centre by naming Juan Daniel Oviedo as her running mate will push her beyond the six million votes she received in the March primaries.

Should Valencia outperform polling forecasts, De la Espriella will be forced on Monday to convince his supporters to back Uribe’s official candidate.

For many Colombians, this election represents more than a contest between three frontrunners. It has become a referendum on President Petro’s stalled reform agenda, the country’s deteriorating security situation, and the future direction of a democracy facing some of its most significant challenges at a time when the “pink tide” of left-wing governments across Latin America has largely receded. Or in the words of former FARC hostage and ex-presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt: “May ethics, hope, truth, and commitment to Colombia prevail today over the machismo, fear, violence, and misogyny of the extremes. I trust that we will have the first woman President.”

 

 

Heard about the 2026 Colombian presidential election first round this weekend? Confused about what exactly is going on? Our guide clues you in on how it all works and why the bars and borders are shut

Tomorrow sees the first round of the 2026 Colombian presidential election. It’s been a long race which has turned particularly bitter in the final week. The candidates are largely campaigning on little more than vibes and charisma, with the centre absent.

While it’s been spiky, the country remains relatively safe on election weekends. You might well see some protests or celebrations on Sunday evening, there might be people on soapboxes in the streets in some areas, but there is unlikely to be any major disturbances in large urban conurbations. The story may well be very different in isolated rural zones, as is often the case in Colombia.

Colombia shuts down a lot over election weekend, with bars closing for ley seca and borders closing as well. There will be an increased police and military presence throughout the country, with particular focus on keeping key transport routes open.

Yesterday we looked at the candidates, how they might fare and what it would mean for the second round. Today we’re turning our attention to how things actually work in the 2026 Colombian presidential election on Sunday, including ley seca times and border closures.

How does the Colombian electoral system work?

Every Colombian over the age of majority (18) and with a correctly registered cédula ciudandanía can vote. In return, each voter gets a half day off work. Non-citizens are not eligible to vote in national elections, but holders of resident visas will be able to vote in next year’s local elections.

Oversight is carried out by the CNE (Consejo Nacional Electoral). In order to do this over the vast territory and number of stations, over 800,000 citizens are selected to be vote-counters. This is similar to jury duty in other countries and is compensated with a day off as well as a compulsory day of training a couple of weeks beforehand.

As the electorate is growing, there are now some 13,000 voting sites across the country, most with multiple voting tables. Colombians have to vote where their cédula is registered, so don’t be surprised to see some people trekking to other cities if they forgot to update their registration.

The polls are open from 8am until 4pm and counting is usually very fast with the results being clear before sundown. Land and fluvial borders will be closed for Colombian nationals tomorrow morning, although foreigners can cross. Airports will not be affected, so don’t worry if you are arriving on a flight.

Bogotá has entered ley seca earlier than usual, meaning no alcohol sales in bars, restaurants or shops from 6pm Friday night to Monday midday. That applies for everyone, so no representation or boozing for foreign residents, unless you do it at home. Ciclovía will also be cancelled for ease of access to polling stations.

What’s the background to the 2026 Colombian presidential election?

The run-up to the 2026 Colombian presidential election has seen a lot of criticism of the system, almost all of it coming from the national government. President Gustavo Petro has been front and centre on this issue, repeatedly questioning the neutrality of the elections.

Petro’s concerns rest on the fact that Thomas Greg and Sons handle the software used in the election system, a firm that he’s clashed with repeatedly, especially over Colombian passport printing. He says that the systems are opaque and he has not received answers from the CNE or Registraduria over various concerns he has. However, both groups, along with Colombia’s neutral election observers MOE have been clear about the processes.

Online, there are many posts claiming that a key part of the alleged fraud will be in the reports made by the jurados. This echoes previous elections, where there was a flurry of images purporting to show electoral forms (E-14) that had been altered. With AI entering the scenario, expect more of this after the first round, especially if de la Espriella or Cepeda do badly.

Voy a escribir porqué los escrutinio son opacos y vulnerables al fraude en las elecciones.

No porque crea que nuestro proyecto democrático vaya a perder sino porque es mi deber como jefe del estado al menos informar sobre uno de los peores riesgos de la democracia hasta ahora…

— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) March 1, 2026

Of course, Petro is only claiming that electoral fraud exists against him, not in the multiple occasions in which he’s won at the voting urns. This is a well established populist tactic – calling elections into doubt before they happen. It’s likely to rally his base and provide an excuse if results are bad.

There is little credibility to most of the vote rigging claims. Colombia does indeed have some serious problems around corruption and influence buying, but this tends to be concentrated in rural zones in the periphery of the country. It’s also worth noting that these seats return candidates from across the political spectrum.

A lot of electoral impropriety is very hard to prove – the machines that promise to deliver blocks of votes are well-versed in legal limits and plausible deniability. Offering someone some free gifts in return for ‘support’, for example, is widespread and while dubious hard to prove in court.

It’s particularly noticeable that alliances between political actors in order to deliver voting blocs is both very common and very hard to stop. That’s where Nicolás Petro appeared to be operating and it is not clear quite who is exactly in bed with who at this point.

It goes without saying that political attacks on the CNE are particularly unhelpful, especially in what is still a very charged political atmosphere nationwide. The assassination of presidential pre-candidate Miguel Uribe last year was a shock to a country that has a long history of political violence.

Concerns remain over both electoral safety and fraud in much of the country, with over 200 municipios at high risk of fraud and/or violence. 39 of those are classed as very high risk and only 167 at very low risk, mainly in the Andino region.

There have been rumblings from Washington about the veracity of the 2026 Colombian presidential elections as well, with Bogotá-born Senator Bernie Moreno in the country as an observer. He can’t vote, having renounced his citizenship. The difference here is that they think Petro is going to rig the elections in his favour.

Petro himself has been rebuked by the Electoral Commission and others for participating in the 2026 Colombian presidential election. He’s repeatedly made comments that are at best close to the line of violating the constitutional neutrality of his office. 

Not only that, but a third of his cabinet have joined in, also being rebuked by the CNE. There’s over 140 public servants under investigation. Iván Cepeda himself has come under fire for a rally in Montería on Monday after campaigns constitutionally have to end. He claims it was a private event, just attended by hundreds of local people.  

Who’s in the 2026 Colombian presidential election?

Over time, the field has been whittled down to thirteen candidates on the official voting card. In reality, though, only three are at the races: Iván Cepeda, Abelardo de la Espriella and Paloma Valencia in order of current voting intention. Together, they account for around 80-90% of polling at the moment.

The left has been concentrated behind Cepeda, while Paloma Valencia has snaffled the centre-right position. Abelardo is the anti-establishment maverick. All the centrist candidates are languishing in the doldrums, with failed Bogotá mayor Claudia López and eternal candidate Sergio Fajardo the best of the bunch but both polling in low single figures.

There’s also the curious option of voto en blanco. Different from a spoiled vote, which is simply disregarded, this is an active protest. If it ranks highest in any race, then a rerun of the election must take place within a month with entirely new candidates and/or party lists.

Iván Cepeda is absolutely nailed on for the second round, almost certainly in first place. Who joins him is a slightly more open question. At the moment, Abelardo has the momentum and is riding high in the polls. However, polling isn’t infallible and Paloma could sneak into second place.

At best, many voters will be voting for their least-worst option in the second round. In recent years, Colombians have often cast negative votes rather than for a candidate they really support and this year is likely to be the same. Whoever wins, it will almost certainly be a loveless victory, despite their inevitable claims of popular support.

The post 2026 Colombian presidential election: How does it work? appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Heard about the 2026 Colombian presidential election first round this weekend? Confused about what exactly is going on? Our guide clues you in on who’s running and what’s likely to happen

The 2026 Colombian presidential election enters its first round this weekend, with the election taking place on Sunday 31st May. If no one takes an overall majority, the run-off will take place three weeks later. It feels like a lifetime since the house elections in March and candidates have been furiously jockeying for position over the last few weeks.

At the moment, continuity candidate Iván Cepeda leads polling, with the rightists split between traditionalist Paloma Valencia and outsider Abelardo de la Espriella. The centre is currently more or less absent. Read on for more information about the candidates, the political backdrop and potential outcomes.

The polls are open from 8am until 4pm on Sunday 31st June for all Colombian nationals wherever their cédula is registered. Counting is usually very fast with the results being clear before sundown. Land and fluvial borders will be closed for Colombian nationals tomorrow morning, although foreigners can cross.

Bogotá will enter ley seca earlier than usual, meaning no alcohol sales in bars, restaurants or shops from 6pm Friday night to Monday midday. That applies for everyone, so no representation or boozing for foreign residents, unless you do it at home. Ciclovía will also be cancelled for ease of access to polling stations.

Who are the runners and riders in the 2026 Colombian presidential election?

Over time, the field has been whittled down to thirteen candidates on the official voting card. In reality, though, only three are at the races: Iván Cepeda, Abelardo de la Espriella and Paloma Valencia in order of current voting intention. Together, they account for around 80-90% of polling at the moment.

The left has been concentrated behind Cepeda, while Paloma Valencia has snaffled the centre-right position. Abelardo is the anti-establishment maverick. All the centrist candidates are languishing in the doldrums, with failed Bogotá mayor Claudia López and eternal candidate Sergio Fajardo the best of the bunch but both polling in low single figures.

Some interesting characters are in the also-run list. Santiago Botero has an incredibly aggressive position on crime: bullets for rapists and so on. Roy Barreras is running as a leftist alternative to Cepeda and Gustavo Matamoros represents the ecologist party of Colombia.

It won’t be third time lucky for Fajardo, who had probably the best thought-out manifesto on paper last time around. His brand of centrism is no longer en vogue and he’s announced his retirement from politics following this election.

Strangely, most of the country’s biggest parties are literally absent from the voting card. The Conservadores and Liberales dominated the last century but now don’t bother running candidates in the 2026 Colombian presidential election. Neither is there a Green candidate or a Cambio Radical candidate. Only Pacto and Centro Democrático are there.

There’s also the curious option of voto en blanco. Different from a spoiled vote, which is simply disregarded, this is an active protest. If it ranks highest in any race, then a rerun of the election must take place within a month with entirely new candidates and/or party lists.

Two candidates on the card have actually pulled out, Carlos Caicedo and Luis Gilberto Murillo. Any votes cast for them will be counted as spoiled, not for voto en blanco. Clara López pulled out earlier, which is why there is a blank space on the tarjetón.

What are the campaigns like?

The manifestos are terribly written, for the main part. There is a frankly shocking number of basic errors in most of them, suggesting that proofreaders weren’t asked to play a big part in production. Despite having had years to plan for this, it seems everybody chose to rush it instead.

Past the errors, there’s a generally low level of detail across all the manifestos. Vague numbers and targets are given with little to no consideration of how it will be achieved. That might lead one to suspect that there isn’t a high chance any of this will actually be stuck to, regardless of the outcome.

There has been no debate among all candidates. Even partial debates have been few and far between, with almost everyone preferring to stick to home turf where they have more control over questions and so forth. There’s been a host of negative publicity via influencer campaigns, with traditional electoral machines being somewhat sidelined.

Iván Cepeda is the continuity candidate, promising more of the same and offering very few details in his actual plan de gobierno, despite it being 433 pages long. He’s had an unusual campaign, turning up to dozens of rallies but offering few interviews. In many ways, he’s not the draw for his campaign.

Read More: Candidate guide to Iván Cepeda

Abelardo de la Espriella has run a controversial and divisive campaign portraying him as the outsider. That’s won him voters and he’s peaking at the right time. His manifesto is long on ideas and short on detail. He’s frequently made inflammatory comments, being accused of sexism, homophobia and racism and often leaning into that.

Read More: Candidate guide to Abelardo de la Espriella

Paloma Valencia has been faltering over the past few weeks in particular. She’s done well to make traditional political alliances, but that could be an albatross for her. Having Uribe’s support might lose as many votes as it gains. Despite this, she’s still in the race and has by far the most detailed manifesto of the three main challengers.

Read More: Candidate guide to Paloma Valencia

It’s notable that a lot of the messaging is quite similar across the candidates. Cepeda is for los nadies; de la Espriella is for los que nunca.  Both Valencia and Cepeda want 30,000km of new roads and are overshadowed by their political mentors. Paloma and Abelardo both want to turn the gas and oil taps back on.

They all support crop substitution for coca farmers and all claim to be anti-corruption. All of them support rural communities and home carers. With this level of agreement, a lot of the distinction that is being drawn is on personality and charisma, hence the two populists exploding in popularity.

So, who’s going to win the 2026 Colombian presidential election?

It’s anyone’s guess at this point, despite the polymarket predictions going wildly overboard in favour of Abelardo de la Espriella. That’s mainly from a certain type of punter that understands little about Colombian politics and is simply making a political statement via putting money on the rightist.

The last election was razor thin, with Gustavo Petro squeaking past Rodolfo Hernández (remember him?) with barely more than 50% of the vote, similar to 2018 when it went the other way for the current president. That’s very likely to be repeated more or less in full: the Pacto candidate dominating the first round then a very close run between the final two and one winning by a nose.

Iván Cepeda is absolutely nailed on for the second round, almost certainly in first place. Who joins him is a slightly more open question. At the moment, Abelardo has the momentum and is riding high in the polls. However, polling isn’t infallible and Paloma could sneak into second place.

More interesting is how many votes everyone gets. Cepeda will want 40% minimum, under that he’s probably in big trouble. If he can get over 45% he’s likely to win the second round. Anything in the middle and we’re into coinflip territory again. Note where the votes come, too. If Abelardo does well in Bogotá, a leftist heartland, that’s a good sign for him.

If Abelardo gets over 30%, he’s in a good position. If Paloma can get to that level, she’s going to be extremely happy. Those two candidates need to match Cepeda’s total at least in order to feel confident. If their combined vote share tops 50% then a rightist victory is likely.

The final numbers to keep an eye on are turnout and the centre vote. The latter will likely be 5-10% and could be crucial for the second round. The former should be over 50%. If it’s not, then the second round could be very unpredictable, especially if it’s two populists. 

Looking ahead, it’s entirely possible that someone could win with under 50% of the vote in the second round. This has become an election that is already both polarised and unstable. It is likely to become very vicious in the next phase, too.

At best, many voters will be voting for their least-worst option in the second round. In recent years, Colombians have often cast negative votes rather than for a candidate they really support and this year is likely to be the same. Whoever wins, it will almost certainly be a loveless victory, despite their inevitable claims of popular support.

The post 2026 Colombian presidential elections: The first hurdle appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Former Colombian Foreign Minister Álvaro Leyva Durán launched a blistering attack against President Gustavo Petro just days before Colombia heads to the polls on May 31, warning of what he described as looming threats to the country’s democratic institutions and accusing the government of preparing to reject an unfavorable electoral outcome.

In a lengthy manifesto published Tuesday on the social media platform X under the title “Propuesta de Álvaro Leyva Durán al País para las Elecciones,” the veteran Conservative politician claimed Petro fears both political defeat and possible legal consequences should right-wing presidential candidate Abelardo De la Espriella emerge victorious.

“Petro knows that his future depends on his successor protecting him from justice,” Leyva wrote, adding that De la Espriella “could win the elections in the first round.”

According to Leyva, the former member of the M-19 guerrilla and senator understands that with De la Espriella in office, “he himself could end up in prison. And that is why he has sought to derail the candidate and will refuse to recognize his victory.”

The explosive accusations mark the latest escalation in the increasingly bitter campaign season ahead of what analysts are calling one of Colombia’s most polarized elections in decades. Leyva, once one of Petro’s closest political allies and his first foreign minister, has in recent months become one of the president’s fiercest critics.

In the manifesto, Leyva intertwined personal memories of Colombia’s turbulent political history with warnings about what he believes is unfolding behind the scenes of the current administration.

“At my age, I know these kinds of stories well,” he wrote, before recalling his close relationship with slain Conservative leader Álvaro Gómez Hurtado.

“My father, Jorge Leyva, gave me at birth the name of his friend Álvaro Gómez Hurtado. When I was 12 years old, Álvaro would speak to me about politics and explain the world to me with a globe.”

Leyva recounted how Gómez and his own father were exiled after the 1953 military coup, and how decades later he worked alongside Gómez politically, even helping negotiate his release after he was kidnapped by the M-19 guerrilla movement in 1988.

“In 1995, after leaving a lecture at Sergio Arboleda University, Álvaro Gómez and I shook hands for the last time,” Leyva wrote. “Because minutes later, I watched in horror as he was assassinated in his car. It was a national tragedy.”

The former minister used Gómez’s legacy as a contrast to his eventual disillusionment with Petro.

“Because of that, I believed I could work with Gustavo Petro,” he said. “When he invited me to become his minister, I accepted because I believed him to be an honorable man. But I was wrong.”

Leyva then delivered some of his harshest remarks yet against the president.

“I came to know the monster from within: his vileness and degradation,” he wrote. “At enormous personal and family cost, I dared to denounce his baseness and his disrespect for the office.”

He added: “Because character demands that one not remain silent in the face of ignominy. And because of everything I witnessed, because of the rotten environment in which he (Petro) moves, I know what the government is plotting.”

Leyva also alleged that Petro’s radicalised supporters to intimidate opponents and manipulate the electoral process. “Today, while Abelardo wages a major democratic battle, Petro incites his followers to commit all kinds of outrages,” he wrote. “There has even been talk of snipers during the campaign.”

Without providing evidence, Leyva claimed that attempts had been made to invalidate De la Espriella’s candidacy, suppress favorable polling data and mobilize state-backed political machinery to influence the vote.

“On election day, rivers of money will flow in an attempt to stop De la Espriella,” he warned.

The former foreign minister also accused Petro of laying the groundwork to dispute the legitimacy of the election itself.

“The president has also spent months constructing a narrative of electoral manipulation,” Leyva wrote. In this way, according to the author, he is “weaving an argument to reject an adverse electoral outcome” that he already senses is inevitable. “That is the false ace up Petro’s sleeve,” he continued. “And like any gambler fueled by hatred, he will use it.”

Leyva also referenced U.S. Republican lawmakers from Florida, María Elvira Salazar and Rick Scott, claiming both were aware of the risks facing Colombia’s democratic process. “Scott is an ally of Colombian democracy and correctly sensed what the national government is planning,” he wrote.

In one of the most dramatic sections of the manifesto, Leyva proposed that Petro temporarily step aside if he alleges fraud after either the first or second round of voting.

“I make a proposal: if in the first or second round Petro claims there was fraud, he should step down from office under the terms of Article 193 of the Constitution,” Leyva wrote.

He suggested that the vice president temporarily assume office while an international commission made up of U.S. lawmakers, European parliamentarians, the Vatican and the United Nations review the vote count and oversee the transition of power before August 7.

“Think about it, Gustavo. Think about it carefully,” Leyva concluded. “Because the alternative will not end well for you. Abelardo De la Espriella will be the next president. And you will have to accept that reality, whether you like it or not.”

Confused about the upcoming Colombian presidential election? We’re here to help you with a set of cheat sheets on the top candidates so you can follow the local news. Today we’re looking at poll leader Iván Cepeda of the Pacto Histórico.

Who is Iván Cepeda?

Iván Cepeda Castro is a leftist politician who has served in the Colombian senate for the last 12 years. Before that, he was a Congressman for a term. Born in Bogotá to activist politician parents, the family was forced into exile in Soviet Czechia and Cuba in his youth. At 63 years of age, he’s notably older than his main rivals.

His father was assassinated for political reasons in 1994, something that has unsurprisingly contributed enormously to his sociopolitical views. He was a young communist, but long since moved away from that, preferring to concentrate on social analysis, activism and campaigning against rightist corruption.

He represents the Pacto Histórico ruling coalition, meaning that he benefits from the popularity of the current president Gustavo Petro. That’s no surprise, as they’ve been firm friends and comrades for years, with the president supporting his bid.

In comparison to his mentor, Cepeda is far more serious. Petro often plays the cuddly socialist grandpa, going off on tangents about free love and so forth. Cepeda is much more of a hardline Maoist academic who is well up for a long march through the institutions. He lacks the charisma of Petro, coming across more professorial and dry.

Is he polling well?

Very. He’s absolutely nailed on for the second round, with the only real question being how high his vote share is. There is some speculation that he may come second, but more likely he will be comfortably in front of the two rightest candidates.

The trickier part is the second round, when the right will be consolidated behind one person rather than split in two. He’s still often favourite against both Abelardo de la Espriella and Paloma Valencia, but likely prefers the former.

While he’s been out in front all through the campaigning process, he’s not really gone anywhere, simply sitting on 38-43% in every poll. While that’s admirable consistency, it also calls into question his ability to draw in the undecided voters.

He’s a marmite candidate, with very few informed voters neutral on him. Either you think he’s the saviour of the republic who can make Colombia more equal or you think he’s a dangerous revolutionary who will ruin the country. A lot of votes are for him under any circumstance and as many are against him under any circumstance.

What’s his campaign like?

Firmly leftist, unsurprisingly. He’s also leaning heavily into being the continuity candidate for the Petro government. That makes sense, with approval levels riding high after the giant minimum wage increase this year. While that might yet be a problem down the line, it’s electoral dynamite.

However, his campaigning has been rather lacklustre. He’s not a natural orator in the way that Petro is, and he lacks charisma, coming across as a dry theoretical academic. Perhaps aware of this, his team have arranged rallies where he can preach to the converted and otherwise keeping him out of the spotlight.

In reality, much of his campaigning is being done by others. Petro is the key figure here, with the president right up against the line of not technically campaigning. However, the head of state is taking a lot of actions that are clearly designed to help Cepeda, as well as constantly using his pulpit to call for the continuation of his ideas.

Complementing this is an incredibly powerful influencer/social push. Much of this is fairly organic, with Pacto supporters used to activism and intuitively good at promoting their candidate. It fits in well with his man of the people image. The biggest meme is ‘Solo pacto en esta mondá’. Notably, Cepeda himself isn’t the draw, with variations on the phrase namechecking Petro.

Combined with his very loose manifesto (see below), his campaign messaging is basically that only the Pacto will stand up for the people, especially those that have been treated poorly by the state. There’s little in the way of concrete offers, just a call for loyalty.

So what’s in his manifesto then?

You can read it for yourself online, but have a big pot of tea ready: it outdoes Marx and Engels at a whopping 433(!) pages long. A lot of that is AI images, while the actual propuestas are hidden away between rambling discourse, tangential essays, theoretical musings and diary entries. Notably, it is mostly in the past and present tenses.

A recurring theme is the involvement of civil society via what he calls the poder constituyente, especially youth and women’s groups. He claims he will call all political and social actors to the table in a mesa de diálogo nacional aimed at forming concrete proposals.

This will be implemented by a new Alianza Público-Popular which will allow civil groups to directly manage state funds. Both ethnic minority and campesino territories will be recognised and organised. There will be a Banco del Pueblo to improve access to financial instruments for poorer people as well as the unbanked.

Security is not a priority, but the key aim is to dismantle armed groups that are ‘successors of paramilitaries’. Iván Cepeda will continue the extant peace talks set up by Petro, but with a red line over assassinations of social leaders. Coca farmers will be encouraged to turn away from illegality via crop substitution.

Corruption will be dealt with by the Secretary for Transparency of the Presidency being given full independence and the Fiscalía receiving an Institute for Macrocorruption, as well as beefing up existing systems. Civil society will be encouraged to involve themselves in these processes.

A new Ley de Austeridad Republicana will be brought in to limit state spending via civil servants in an attempt to cut costs. He will reduce the salaries of the president’s office immediately and encourage his ministers to do the same. There will be greater scrutiny of public spending across all levels of the state. Again, no details.

More interesting is the promise to give victims of corruption resources, partially funded by seizure of illegal gains. All of this will be aimed at the parts of the country with the highest rates of corruption and impunity.

Victims of the conflict, meanwhile, will benefit from a new acuerdo nacional which will aim to deliver further reparations. He will also make sure that the 2016 peace agreement is carried out as originally planned, focusing on the Planes de Desarollo con Enfoque Territorial (PDET) for the areas most affected.

International relations will not revolve around the interests of Washington or Miami (?), but rather the national interest. The plan is for autonomy and integration, again involving civil society to work with foreign-based counterparts.

For rural areas, there will be 30,000km of minor roads built to improve connections to far-flung places, known as the vías para la paz. There will also be more rights to participate in politics, defend territory, improve connectivity and services, more land restitution and so on, none of which is clearly defined or detailed in numbers.

Rubbish is on the agenda, unlike any other candidate. He promises to strengthen and enforce recycling schemes and the basura cero initiative. Revitalisation and regrowth of urban areas is also under plan. On transport, he says he will rejuvenate trains as well as sort out the roads.

Who is he running with?

Aida Marina Quilcué Vivas is an Indigenous activist and current senator of the Republic. While she won’t bring any votes with her, this is a huge signal from the Pacto that they are serious about Indigenous representation.

Her selection shows Pacto confidence that they don’t need to reach out and form alliances with other groups. The advantage is that Quilcué and Cepeda will agree on virtually everything, in sharp contrast to Petro and Francia Márquez.

Quilcué has been an active part of the campaign, rallying supporters across the country, especially in rural and Indigneous areas. She’s chastised Abelardo for using the jaguar as a symbol. She’s also clashed with Paloma Valencia over indigenous rights in Cauca.

Is he a communist guerrilla that will expropriate my property?

No, he’s not. He was a young communist, but distanced himself from the party (against the wishes of his family) three and a half decades ago. He’s not a guerilla either and never has been, despite his closeness to M-19. He’s a leftist for sure, but that is not synonymous with communism either in act or desire.

The reason this gets so much traction is that he has certainly been close to guerilla groups, either working with them or in peace talks. He doesn’t help this by his actions, often going out of his way to avoid criticising groups that have a nominally leftist agenda, while specifying that he wants to go after ex-paras.

What’s all this about the Caso Uribe?

Iván Cepeda has been a fierce critic of Álvaro Uribe dating all the way back to when Uribe was in the Casa de Nariño. In many ways, the ex-president has defined Cepeda’s political career as much as Petro, though as sworn enemy rather than comrade. 

Cepeda accused the ex-president of links to paramilitarism, relating to the falsos positivos case and others. After repeated attacks in the Senate, Uribe filed a defamation writ against Cepeda, which was eventually annulled. In turn, Uribe found himself under investigation for allegedly attempting to influence witnesses in that case.

Vindication came last year with a Bogotá court ruling in favour of Cepeda after over a decade of deliberation. However, it was only a partial victory, with the ex-president only being declared guilty of fraude procesal y soborno en actuación judicial.

This means there is absolutely no love lost between the two, with Uribe’s preferred candidate Paloma Valencia and Iván Cepeda frequently clashing in the Senate and in the media. Abelardo de la Espriella also is close to Uribe, having represented him legally.

Any skeletons in his closet?

Yes. He has a habit of ignoring things that aren’t connected to paramilitarism or the peace process, ending up as one of the most absent senators in the last couple of years. He also has habitually evaded making clear statements on his health following his diagnosis of bowel cancer. He claims it is in remission, but rumours swirl that it is not. 

Then there’s the Operation Fénix affair. He was allegedly namechecked in emails found in a raid on a FARC base. It’s never been fully proved or denied, but has always hung over him. Added to the controversy over recent audioclips by guerrillas referring to him as a comrade, it fuels the fire for those who see him as too close to armed groups.

So, can he succeed?

Yes, he can and is probably the favourite at the moment. It would be absolutely shocking were he not to get to the second round and he matches up well with both of the two people he’s likely to face there.

Of the two rightists, he probably wants to see Abelardo against him. While he carries a threat as a markedly anti-establishment candidate in contrast to Cepeda’s life in politics, he will also turn off some of the anti-left candidates, especially those who want someone serious.

Voto en blanco could then become the decider. If we end up with a situation where a high number of voters decide they want neither option, Cepeda is likely in luck. It’s entirely possible that he could win without crossing 50% of the vote.

The popularity of Petro works in his favour, as does the minimum wage issue. Many will want further increases and see him as the best way to get that done. This may not be a vote for him so much as for the Pacto, but they all count.

However, there are no guarantees. He will get very few voters coming across from eliminated candidates. The key battle here will be turnout, which usually increases by 5-10 percentage points for the runoff.

The post Candidate guides for the 2026 Colombian elections: Iván Cepeda appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Colombia entered the final week of campaigning on Monday ahead of a presidential election that has exposed deep political divisions, sharpened ideological tensions and raised concerns over the country’s security and economic future.

The three leading candidates in the 2026 race wrapped up major public appearances over the weekend with rallies across Bogotá, where supporters waving flags, chanting slogans and wearing campaign colors filled arenas, public plazas and avenues in a final push before Sunday’s first-round vote.

The election has increasingly become a referendum on the legacy of President Gustavo Petro and the future direction of the South American nation after four years marked by failed social reforms, diplomatic friction, fiscal pressures and a deteriorating security conditions ahead of the May 31 election.

Senator Iván Cepeda, the candidate aligned with Petro’s governing Historic Pact coalition, entered the final stretch of the campaign presenting himself as the defender of progressive reforms and social justice policies aimed at reducing inequality and expanding access to education, pensions and healthcare.

Speaking before supporters in Bogotá’s historic Plaza de Bolívar, Cepeda urged Colombians to “defend hope” and reject what he described as a return to the political establishment that governed Colombia before Petro’s historic 2022 victory.

“Our project is one of dignity, peace and social transformation,” the hard-left senator told supporters. “We cannot allow fear and hatred to reverse the changes that millions of Colombians demanded.”

Cepeda has pledged to continue the government’s controversial “Total Peace” strategy, which seeks negotiated settlements with armed guerrilla groups and criminal organizations. The policy, however, has failed to curb violence and has instead allowed illegal armed factions to strengthen territorial control in rural areas.

Security has emerged as one of the defining issues of the campaign following a rise in massacres, attacks against security forces and extortion in regions including Catatumbo, Cauca and parts of the Pacific coast. Several recent bomb attacks and clashes involving dissident rebel groups have intensified public anxiety and become central talking points for opposition candidates.

Conservative lawyer and political outsider Abelardo de la Espriella has capitalized on growing frustration over insecurity, presenting himself as the candidate of “authority and order.”

During rallies attended by thousands in Bogotá, Barranquilla and Medellín, de la Espriella has promised a sweeping security crackdown against illegal armed groups, tougher prison sentences and expanded support for the military and police.

“Colombia cannot continue surrendering territory to criminals and terrorists,” he told cheering supporters. “The state must recover authority in every corner of the country.”

De la Espriella has also sought to attract business leaders and middle-class voters concerned about inflation, unemployment and slowing investment. His campaign platform includes proposals for tax reductions, deregulation and incentives aimed at restoring investor confidence after several years of economic uncertainty.

Meanwhile, senator Paloma Valencia closed her campaign with a massive event at Bogotá’s Movistar Arena, in which she framed the election as a battle to prevent Colombia from drifting toward authoritarianism and economic collapse. Throughout the campaign, she has repeatedly warned voters against what she calls “the Venezuelanization of Colombia,” a message that has resonated strongly among conservative sectors and business elites.

“We are voting for democracy, liberty and the survival of our institutions,” Valencia said during her closing rally. “Colombia cannot continue down the path of division and improvisation.”

Political analysts say the election reflects a country increasingly polarized between those who support Petro’s promise of structural change and those who believe the administration’s policies have weakened institutions, damaged investor confidence and emboldened armed groups.

Recent polling suggests Cepeda maintains a narrow lead heading into Sunday’s vote, though few observers expect any candidate to secure the more than 50 percent needed to avoid a runoff election scheduled for June 21.

The latest surveys indicate a highly competitive contest for second place between Valencia and de la Espriella, setting the stage for what could become one of the most polarized second-round races in Colombia’s modern political history.

Beyond ideology, many voters say they remain concerned about rising living costs, access to employment, corruption and public safety.

In downtown Bogotá, where campaign caravans and political posters have become a daily feature of city life, voters have expressed exhaustion after months of aggressive rhetoric and constant political confrontation.

With just days remaining before Colombians head to the polls, authorities across the country have increased security measures amid concerns over possible unrest and isolated acts of political violence.

Sunday’s election is widely viewed as one of the most consequential in decades, with the outcome expected to shape Colombia’s political and economic direction long after the campaign slogans and rallies fade from the streets of Bogotá.

Confused about the upcoming Colombian presidential election? We’re here to help you with a set of cheat sheets on the top candidates so you can follow the local news. Today we’re looking at Paloma Valencia of the Centro Democrático.

Who is Paloma Valencia?

Paloma Susana Valencia Laserna is a conservative politician who has represented the Centro Democrático in the Senate for 12 years. She won her primary battle with three million votes in March, confirming her position as the establishment rightist candidate.

Anti-establishment types, look away now. Her paternal grandfather Guillermo León Valencia was President of the Republic from 1962-66, while her maternal grandfather Mario Laserna Pinzón founded the Universidad de los Andes.

Perhaps not coincidentally, that’s her alma mater, studying economics there before a Master’s in creative writing at New York University. She’s been heavily involved in politics for two decades now, originally as a candidate for Alas Equipo Colombia before jumping ship to the Centro Democrático.

Her faith is deeply important to her, as is tradition. Coming from the circle of the Popayán elite, she is a fairly standard conservative on most cultural and social issues. On the economy, she tacks more to a neoliberal line.

Is she polling well?

Not as well as she would like. While she won comfortably in the March primaries as part of the Gran Consulta por Colombia, she has since fluctuated around 15-25%, usually rising and falling in rhythm with rightist rival Abelardo de la Espriella.

Most recent polling has her in third place a week out from the election, which is a problem. She does outperform Abelardo in head-to-head matchups with Iván Cepeda in most polls, which her messaging will want to lean into over the coming week.

What’s her campaign like?

Centrism, slightly improbably. As one of two rightists in an election with a clearly dominant leftist candidate, two flailing centrists and a host of also-rans, she’s positioning herself as the closest to the centre of the viable options.

However, she’s firmly of the right, although tempered somewhat by her far more liberal vicepresidential candidate Juan Daniel Oviedo. This is best evidenced by the fact she is very much ‘la que dice Uribe’, clearly having the backing of the controversial yet still influential ex-president.

Her campaign logo features a cross, with religion playing a large role for her stance on many cultural and social issues. She leans heavily into those as a conservative. Colombia Más Grande is the slogan, but they don’t use it particularly well.

If elected, she would be Colombia’s first ever female head of state (with a first ever gay vicepresident too), although she’s not really leant into that much as you might think. As with much else, she’s not managing to cut through particularly well on socials or make a big splash in the national debate.

So what’s in her manifesto then?

You can read it for yourself online, under the name 111puntos. You even get an extra point for free. It’s fairly well presented, laid out and supported, but that’s not necessarily going to win any votes. Overall, other than a massive reliance on AI, there’s no big surprise or radical shakeup here, more a return to the old ways of doing things.

Paloma is certainly no dove when it comes to security and crime, promising a tough line. COP$20tn over four years for the armed forces in order to modernise and rebuild, finishing at 4% of annual GDP destined for the forces. That includes recruiting 30,000 more military personnel and the same number of police officers.

The rest of the money will go on increasing pay, conditions and so forth as well as a big push on tech. Drones are the centrepiece for investment, but cyberdefence is also highlighted as an area that needs urgent investment. 

Slightly more old-school is her plan to militarise key transportation routes immediately. More of the same with coca farms: more spraying that allegedly won’t affect ecosystems or people, combined with subsidies for substitution. The fact that neither of those things have worked for decades isn’t stopping her.

On the other side of the coin, Paloma Valencia promises zero impunity: “el que la hace, la paga”. That means more powers to seize illicit gains and more prison sentences for those found guilty of corruption, reducing the number of casa por carcel sentences. 22,000 more penitentiary places and 19,000 more prisoners.

There will be 50 new casas de justicia and mobile courts to tour the country visiting rural locations that are currently not served by the legal systems. All of this is working towards an aim to get congestion in the system from 48% down to 0. Ominously, there’s also a promise of a law to “regulate protest and punish vandalism”.

New laws on corruption are to be brought in, mostly focused around greater transparency using tech. That means blockchain to record transactions and deals as well as AI to analyse potential discrepancies. There will be greater enforcement of existing regulations and a guardian of public integrity to oversee processes.

On the economy, it’s all about recovering confidence from the international market. That will be done by getting infrastructure and mining production back up to pre-pandemic levels (6%+), USD$10mn more in exports and growth over five percent annually.

More FDI to the tune of USD$2bn annually, 25% of GDP to go into internal investment and reducing the deficit by COP$50tn. How is she going to pay for all this? With, err, tax cuts for homeowners and businesses, efficiency savings of 25% and debt refinancing. Good luck with all that.

She’s the only candidate to really take the healthcare crisis seriously. First up is a promise to resolve 10 million blocked prescriptions, appointments and so on in the first 100 days. She plans to send doctors to patients in rural areas, not the other way round.

This will be paid for by a COP$9tn investment. A third of that is destined for delivery of outstanding operations and prescriptions, the rest for paying accumulated state debt to healthcare operators. Many taxpayers won’t like the latter.

Energy faces a similar situation: paying off state debts to operators within the first three months. The goal here is to avoid blackouts and brownouts in the short term, while putting in place structures to avoid the same issues over the long term.

Turning on the taps for both oil and gas lies at the heart of this plan, with a reboot of exploration and extraction projects. Partly, this is to attract AI database and server investment. There’s also support for renewables and alternatives, but it seems more of an afterthought.

Her plan on international relations is to ride two horses. Free competition with China and more co-operation on infrastructure and exports from Colombia. At the same time, leadership in Donald Trump’s Shield of the Americas project while guaranteeing that only the Colombian Armed Forces will operate in national territory.

There will be 187,000 free school places for talented children, 150,000 grants for vulnerable children and 10 public superschools. ICETEX loans, in line with other countries, will only be repayable when you have a salary. COLFUTURO will be rescued as well. The 16 biggest urban centres will have psycho-social units to look out for vulnerable children.

Businesses employing people under 28 will receive a subsidy of up to 30% of minimum wage for a year. Agricultural workers will receive better lines of credit, three million hectares of land formalised and a million new farming zones designated. Tourism is projected to double, with new routes opened for Asia and Europe.

There is a heavy focus on the grey economy. Informal workers will have access to seed capital, loans, a virtual wallet and a host of other possibilities. The goal is to offer help without persecution.

Pensioners will all be covered unconditionally, regardless of law or budget changes as well as three million vulnerable adults to receive subsidies. Each child born into poverty will have COP$500,000 put aside as seed capital to start saving.

Infrastructure starts off with 35,000km of new roads as well as increased satellite connectivity for marginalised communities. There will be 1 million new homes built, with a quarter of those directly subsidised. A million further homes will receive new or improved potable water access.

Finally, the environment. The brakes will go on for deforestation and the national parks will be protected from guerrilla activity. Local families will be given subsidies in order to protect areas of natural interest. Money generated from mining will be ploughed back into environmental protection.

Who is she running with?

Juan Daniel Oviedo, former head of DANE and candidate in the last race for Bogotá mayor. In that contest, he managed to force Gustavo Bolívar into third place in a two-horse race, showcasing his impressive campaigning ability. He came second in the Gran Consulta with over a million votes, reinforcing his reputation. 

He’s been more visible than Paloma Valencia for much of the campaign and is much more active than either of the other two undercards. That was the reason he was brought in – to appeal to more liberal voters and to provide an injection of energy on socials. He’s delivered in spades on both accounts.

However, there are a couple of issues here. Firstly, he runs the risk of overshadowing Paloma Valencia with his charisma and presence. Secondly, by joining her campaign he lost some of those centrist voters who saw it as a betrayal to join forces with the Centro Democrático.

They certainly aren’t natural bedfellows, with Oviedo a fair bit left of Valencia on a lot of economic issues. More profound splits are found on social issues. For example, Oviedo is out and proud while Valencia stands against gay adoption and marriage. Awkward at best. 

Why do people say she’s ‘la que dice Uribe’?

Pido respetuosamente votar por Paloma Valencia. pic.twitter.com/HpS5XjGdVw

— Álvaro Uribe Vélez (@AlvaroUribeVel) May 18, 2026

That’s a bit unfair on a candidate with a long and storied political career of her own. However, while she isn’t just Uribe’s candidate, she certainly makes a lot of having his passionate backing.

That’s been a mixed blessing for a while now, with Uribe’s influence waning as the years pass. While his candidate won in 2018, they failed to even make the second round in 2014 and 2022 and we could well be on for a repeat of that.

The ex-president certainly casts a long shadow and that’s not always positive, especially with Oviedo also shining bright. Support for Uribe has dwindled over the past two decades, as Colombian demographics change profoundly.

However, Uribe does retain a large swell of support and also commands the biggest party machine of the candidates in the race. The Centro Democrático will be able to make a huge campaigning push on and offline across the entire country, which may be underreported. 

Any skeletons in her closet?

A few, mainly over her combative social media use while in the Senate. Paloma Valencia has largely avoided serious controversy though, with most of her twitterstorms being differences of opinion rather than accusations of impropriety.

She accused now-president Gustavo Petro of corruption in 2018 following the Odebrecht affair. This amounted to grainy footage of him receiving cash at an unknown point. That was archived as being far too flimsy to be evidence of anything at all.

In 2022 she defended the Colombian state’s actions during the armed conflict, saying that while there may have been errors and atrocities, they were legitimate and in defence of the country. That unsurprisingly met with a huge backlash from various quarters.

Una narrativa mucho más constructiva (y verdadera) es: Los para y la guerrrilla fueron y son monstruosos. El Estado cometió errores y atrocidades, pero era legítimo y fundamentalmente estuvo en la defensa de los ciudadanos.

— Paloma Valencia L (@PalomaValenciaL) July 29, 2022

There is one case hanging over Paloma Valencia still. Her link to Uribe led to her questioning the legitimacy of a key witness in the case against him. In turn, the witnesses defence lawyers filed a defamation case against the senator, over which the Supreme Court has ordered a conciliatory process. That has not yet concluded.

She’s also clashed with Cepeda’s vicepresidential candidate Aida Quilcué over indigenous rights in Cauca. Indeed, she’s gone as far as to suggest splitting the entire department in two, one for Indigenous Colombians only, something many view as racially motivated.

So, can she succeed?

Yes, she can. Next weekend is arguably a harder test for her than a second round would be if she gets through. Similar concerns swirled around her in the Gran Consulta por Colombia, but she ended up sailing through comfortably. 

If she can repeat that trick, she matches up better than anyone else against Iván Cepeda. However, that’s very far from guaranteed, as they’re closely matched. It’s assumed that she’ll gain a lot of Abelardo voters, but that may not be true. The anti-left will flock to her, but the anti-establishment might not.

Her main draw is presenting herself as the only viable sensible candidate. In part that’s with Oviedo on board, in part that both Cepeda and de la Espriella are seen as populist. There’s a lot of centrist voters that will hold their noses and vote for her along those lines.

Having said all that, centrism isn’t in vogue in many places globally and Colombia is no exception. That may block her even getting to a final face-off and her chances of winning rest with anti-Cepeda votes. More than any other candidate, hers would be a loveless victory.

The post Candidate guides for the 2026 Colombian elections: Paloma Valencia appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Confused about the 2026 Colombian presidential elections? We’re here to help you with a set of cheat sheets on the top candidates so you can follow the local news. First we’re looking at Abelardo de la Espriella of Defensores de la Patria.

Who is Abelardo de la Espriella?

Abelardo de la Espriella hails from Montería, which he makes great play of. He was actually born in Bogotá, as well as studying in various universities here. He rose to fame as a defence lawyer, eventually setting up his own firm, De La Espriella Lawyers Enterprise. Their clients have been varied (more of that later).

He has a colourful background alongside his legal activity, releasing two albums of classical and traditional music as well as launching De La Espriella Style, his menswear line. He also has his fingers in other pies, including rum, wine and coffee, several books and a foundation to help impoverished kids.

A former atheist, he saw the light in the pandemic and came around to Catholicism, which is convenient for winning votes in a deeply religious country. He holds Italian and US passports. He takes pride in his appearance, often suited and tidily-bearded but switching to sombreros vueltiaos or guayaberas when appropriate.

While he has a varied and successful background in business, he has no experience at all in government, either at local or national level. He is leaning into that, taking the mantle of the outsider candidate and promising to do politics differently. Courting controversy is second nature for this bullish and outspoken candidate.

Is he polling well?

He started strongly towards the end of last year, then seemed to have dipped as we moved into springtime. Since the March elections though, he’s picked up the pace again and is peaking again at just the right time.

He’s now ahead of Paloma again with most pollsters and stands a good chance of making the second round, where he faces a strong challenge against Cepeda. His incredibly divisive rhetoric and persona mean that he doesn’t match up easily in a one-on-one.

Like many populists in the caudillo mould, he splits opinions – while he wins a lot of hearts and minds, so too does he turn a lot of people against him. Very few people are neutral on Abelardo, which means he could struggle to win the more centrist voters, even against Cepeda. Expect voto en blanco to do well if he’s in the second round.

What’s his campaign like?

Pick your adjective depending on how you view him generally: controversial, innovative, problematic, fierce, strong, crass, outspoken. What’s unarguable is that it is very much focused on him, features a lot of show and spin and is extremely light on detail.

Very much in the vein of a Trump or Bukele, two key influences he acknowledges himself, he positions himself as the outsider candidate compared to the professional politicians in the race. This has not only been successful elsewhere, but almost took Rodolfo Hernández to the presidency four years ago.

Interestingly, Abelardo de la Espriella is in one way openly following a very similar line to the leftists he claims to hate. He is courting “los que nunca” against “los que siempre”, fitting his position as the outsider candidate. His promises often revolve directly around shaking everything up.

So what’s in his manifesto then?

You can read it for yourself online, or what is there at least. It’s barely a manifesto and more a collection of ideas, positions and wishes. He focuses heavily on law and order with a generous side serving of efficiency savings. Quite how any of this will get done or whether it’s viable is often unclear.

First thing on the agenda is that he’s tough on crime. He’s proposed 10 megacarceles in the Bukele mould, a ‘primera linea’ of reservists and veterans and a new bloque de búsqueda for barrios. He targets a 30% reduction in gender-based violence and 40% cut in feminicides. That involves an accelerated 24/7 judicial process in 72 hours maximum. 

More widely, he wants to reform and better fund the armed forces in order to both establish state control of territory and enforce the state monopoly on arms. That carries over into his stance on armed groups. He wants to eliminate 330,000 hectares of coca farms using any and all tools available to him. That means spraying, manual elimination, express recuperation of proceeds of crime and so on.

Para cambiar a Colombia primero hay que sobrevivirle a quienes no quieren que cambie. pic.twitter.com/h6Tf8refWr

— De La Espriella Presidente (@AbelardoPTE) May 17, 2026

The mano dura is also set to come down on politicians. He’s fiercely anti-corruption, which he defines broadly. He plans to start with Ecopetrol and then clean out state organisations of their links to “narco-trafficking, corruption and bad management”.

Politicians and administrators that are not corrupt won’t be safe, either. He promises zero tolerance for ineptitude and inefficiency. He wants results within 100 days and those with empty hands will be told to sling their hook. Ambassadors have been told they need to promote the country, not just shoot whisky on the public purse.

Tax avoidance is also on the radar – Abelardo de la Espriella wants to use AI to radically improve DIAN’s processes and deal with widespread avoidance. Subsidies will also be revised to make sure they are going to the right places.

He wants to recover energy self-sufficiency and to restart drilling and exploration as well. Gas is his main focus, although rare earth mining is also highlighted, alongside reform of the costly ElectroCaribe. A main driver is drawing a clear line between legal and illegal mining.

The national budget will also benefit from the efficiency savings – merging or abolishing agencies he sees as redundant such as the Ministerio de Igualdad. That’s part of a shock plan to save around 3.1% of GDP.

With those savings, the aim is to get the deficit to -4.8%(!) within the first year, falling to under 3.5% or lower by 2030. Dovetailing with that is a promise to anchor the debt/GDP ratio at no higher than 55%. All this will require annual growth of at least 3% with 5%+ targeted.

On education, there is to be greater focus on technology, as well as a ‘virtual university’ and free computers in schools. Unsurprisingly, details are limited. A STEM program specifically aimed at girls will be set up to deal with the tech gender gap.

Rural communities are a key part of his voter base and he’s promising 600,000 new jobs outside cities as well as 100,000 young people to receive education on improved farming methods and use of tech. 2 million hectares are to be delivered to the people.

Rounding up, there will be COP$125bn aimed at co-investment or seed capital for creative projects; mass sterilisation of stray animals to reduce populations and 200,000 carers to be given subsidies.

Who is he running with?

José Manuel Restrepo, the closest thing to an aristocrat that a two-century-old republic can have. He claims direct descendency from revolutionary hero Francisco de Paula Santander. In sharp contrast to Abelardo, he’s a classic buttoned-down conservative.

He served under Duque as Ministro de Hacienda following the botched intent at fiscal reform, having previously been at Comercio. Outside of politics he has been rector of three different universities, most notably the Rosario, his alma mater alongside Bath and the LSE. 

However, given that Abelardo de la Espriella loves the limelight, his undercard is not a key part of this campaign. While the other two real candidates have genuinely strong vice-presidential candidates, Abelardo is doing all the heavy lifting himself.

What’s all this El Tigre stuff?

Abelardo understands the importance of branding, and this is a key part of his appeal. He says that the big cat represents courage, ferocity and independence, all of which are qualities he identifies with. In a country where blankets featuring tigers are a staple of many homes, this is a good brand to have.

Tigre in Colombia can refer to tigers or jaguars, both of which he uses, though the former are more common. That means video screens with dancing tigers on them, tiger-print shoes up for sale and a whole lot more. He’s often to be seen wearing tiger-print clothes.

Cepeda’s running mate Aida Quilcué has publicly asked him to stop using jaguars as part of this, claiming they hold a special significance for Indigenous Colombians. Abelardo de la Espriella has predictably ignored that.

Any skeletons in his closet?

Sort of. There’s certainly a great deal of controversy, but a lot of it he simply leans into and doesn’t see as problematic at all. That’s true of personal attacks on Paloma Valencia,  as well as frequent homophobic and sexist outbursts.

It’s less true of his past as a criminal defence lawyer, an area that often makes him quite touchy. He has represented some pretty shady characters, including Álvaro Uribe himself. Jorge Pretelt and David Guzmán are just two high-profile clients accused of corruption that de la Espriella has defended.

In fairness, his firm has also taken on some genuinely important defences, most notably Natalia de la Ponce and Rosa Elvira Cely. However, even this is disputed, with family members taking to Instagram to dispute his take on that and suggest it was more about financial interest.

Then there’s the outstanding allegations that the firmas he collected in order to be able to run were improperly registered. He won 5 million, more than any other Colombian, of which 3 million were ruled invalid. That still leaves him comfortably over the threshold, but raises questions about his support. 

So, can he succeed?

Yes, he can. It’s nowhere near guaranteed that he’ll make the second round, of course, and he absolutely has the potential to do or say something that will torpedo his campaign. However, he’s a maverick and is campaigning well, which makes him unpredictable.

He is offering easy solutions to complex problems, but that’s often popular with the electorate. Get past the rhetoric and he identifies a lot of key problems and his proposals could be a good thing. He just doesn’t make it clear exactly how this is going to happen.

More to the point, Abelardo de la Espriella represents the outsider position compared to everyone else: he really is not a professional politician like them, for good or for bad. Again, that’s popular with many voters after decades of incompetence from technocrats.

Comparisons with Trump in the USA or Bukele in El Salvador are clichéd, but they stand up. He frequently flirts with sexism and homophobia while mocking opponents, but claims innocence, he promises a hard line on crime and he avoids clarity over his proposals. Both those candidates won comfortably with similar electorates to Colombia.

If he gets to the second round, he could win due to a dislike of the other candidate, as that will almost certainly be Cepeda. In that case, there could be a lot of voters holding their noses to vote either for or against him. At the moment, that’s a coin flip.

The post Candidate guides for the 2026 Colombian elections: Abelardo de la Espriella appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez confronted a group of protesters outside his residence in Rionegro, Antioquia, on Wednesday after activists began painting a mural referencing victims of Colombia’s “false positives” scandal.

Videos and images shared widely on social media showed Uribe surrounded by security personnel while holding a paint roller near the wall where the mural was being painted. Wearing a light field jacket and broad-brimmed hat, the former president appeared visibly upset as tensions rose between demonstrators, supporters and members of his security team.

The incident quickly became one of Colombia’s most discussed political flashpoints this week, exposing deep divisions surrounding the country’s internal armed conflict with ex-FARC, the transitional justice system, and the increasingly polarized 2026 presidential race. The official candidate of Uribe’s Centro Democrático party, Paloma Valencia, is considered Cepeda’s strongest rival in the event of a run-off election on June 21.

Uribe later said he had interrupted a political meeting in Medellín after receiving a call informing him that a large group had gathered near the entrance to his property while his wife was home alone.

“Cowardly Cepeda, stop sending people to my house where my lady was alone,” Uribe wrote on X Wednesday, referring his political foe and presidential frontrunner Iván Cepeda.

In a separate statement, Uribe accused the hard-leftist senator and Hernán Muriel, a congressman from the governing Historic Pact coalition, of promoting what he described as “acts of provocation and intimidation” against his family.

According to Uribe, the protesters arrived in three buses and gathered close to the entrance of the estate while artists painted the mural. He claimed one of his supporters was injured with a knife during the confrontation and said a member of his security detail was also hurt.

“I told them that I was going to erase the mural,” Uribe wrote. “Before provoking violence against my family and our home, they would have to kill me.”

Later footage showed Uribe personally covering the painted wall with a roller while supporters and security personnel stood guard nearby.

The mural referenced the latest figures released by Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP), the transitional tribunal created following the 2016 peace accord with FARC. The tribunal recently updated estimates tied to the “false positives” scandal, in which civilians were allegedly killed by members of the armed forces and falsely presented as combat casualties during more than four decades of Colombia’s internal conflict.

Muriel, who organized the demonstration, rejected accusations that the protest was intended to threaten Uribe or his family. He described the gathering “as a peaceful act” organized by victims’ organizations, social movements and human rights defenders seeking to highlight the revised JEP findings.

“We are carrying out an act of social mobilization and memory pedagogy,” Muriel said in remarks shared online. “We are here with social organizations, victims and human rights defenders following the new figure of 7,837 false positives announced by the JEP.”

According to Muriel, the mural was painted on public property near the residence and was intended to commemorate victims of the conflict.

The confrontation prompted swift reactions from political allies of the former president in Antioquia, one of Colombia’s most conservative regions and a longtime bastion of Uribe’s “democratic security” agenda.

Medellín Mayor Federico Gutiérrez criticized the protest and accused supporters of President Gustavo Petro of fostering political hostility toward opposition figures. “It’s the same method used during the last mayoral campaign in Medellín,” he wrote on social media, adding that political tensions in the country were continuing to escalate.

Antioquia Governor Andrés Julián Rendón also condemned the incident and called for respect toward Uribe and his family.

The episode underscores how historical revisionism spread on social media continues to discredit the legacy of the country’s two-term president (2002-2010), and leading opposition leaders. By Thursday morning, the images from Rionegro — showing Uribe beside the mural with a paint roller in hand — had spread across Colombian media and social networks, becoming the latest symbol of how the left justifies ideologically-fueled protests to vandalize public space and infrastructure.

A new national survey suggests Colombia’s 2026 presidential race is shaping into a high-stakes runoff between Iván Cepeda and conservative rival Paloma Valencia, with the first round on May 31 favoring the left-wing senator, but the second round  – on June 21 – projecting a narrow victory for the Centro Democratico candidate.

The latest poll by Fundación Génesis Crea places Cepeda at the top of voter intention for the first round with 35.1%, followed by Valencia with 25.4% and lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella with 21.6%, signaling an increasingly polarized contest just weeks before Colombians head to the polls.

The survey, conducted between May 4 and May 11 across 134 municipalities and 24 departmental capitals, interviewed 4,352 citizens and presents one of the most detailed snapshots yet of the country’s electoral mood ahead of what many analysts are calling the most decisive presidential vote in years.

Despite Cepeda’s strong lead in the opening round, the numbers suggest a dramatic reversal in a hypothetical runoff. In a second-round scenario against Valencia, the senator from the Democratic Center would secure 48.3% of the vote, compared to 45.6% for Cepeda, while blank votes would account for 6.1%.

The findings indicate that while Cepeda commands a consolidated progressive base, Valencia could benefit from a broader anti-government coalition in a runoff, uniting conservative, centrist and undecided voters wary of continuity with President Gustavo Petro’s political project.

Against other rivals, Cepeda performs more strongly. He would defeat De la Espriella with 46.5% to 41.4%, and also surpass former Bogotá mayor Claudia López with 47.2% to 40.2%, though blank voting would remain unusually high at around 12% in both matchups.

The poll also reflects the deep national divide over Petro’s presidency. Some 51.2% of respondents reported an unfavorable image of the president, while 44.6% viewed him positively. By contrast, former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez registered a 50.4% favorable rating, with 48.3% holding an unfavorable view.

These figures reinforce the enduring political influence of Uribe, whose legacy continues to shape right-wing mobilization, while Petro faces growing criticism over security concerns, economic uncertainty and the faltering progress of his “Total Peace” agenda.

Beyond the top three contenders, voter preference remains fragmented. López registers 3.6%, followed by Sergio Fajardo at 2.9%, while other names such as Roy Barreras, Mauricio Liscano and Carlos Caicedo remain below 1%.

Blank voting stands at 3.2%, while 5.4% of respondents said they remain undecided — a figure that could prove decisive in an increasingly volatile campaign season.

The study reports a margin of error of ±1.485% and a 95% confidence level, with data weighted according to official demographic indicators from the Dane and the National Civil Registry. The sample covered all major regions of Colombia, including the Caribbean, Pacific, Coffee Region, Llanos and Amazon basin.

With just two weeks before the first decisive round, the poll confirms that Colombia is heading toward an electoral confrontation defined less by ideological persuasion than by rejection: a battle between those seeking continuity with Petro’s leftist administration and those determined to stop it.

For now, Cepeda leads the first charge. But if the runoff materializes as projected, Paloma Valencia may be waiting at the finish line.

The departure of former Vice President Germán Vargas Lleras’s coffin from Bogotá’s Palacio de San Carlos on Monday morning blended state mourning with unmistakable political symbolism, as Colombia’s political elite gathered to bid farewell to one of the country’s most influential figures.

His daughter, Clemencia Vargas Umaña, attended the ceremony accompanied by her father’s two French bulldogs – Toño and Henry –  adding a deeply personal note to the solemn proceedings before the main funeral mass at 11:00 a.m. inside Bogotá’s Primatial Cathedral of Bogotá. The service marked the conclusion of three days in which the Foreign Ministry headquarters became the center of national political attention.

Vice President Francia Márquez represented the national government in the absence of President Gustavo Petro and delivered one of the most emotional moments of the day when she embraced Clemencia Vargas before the ceremony. Earlier, Márquez had publicly offered condolences to the family, praising Vargas Lleras’ democratic legacy and saying his “democratic work will be remembered.”

The wake drew figures from across Colombia’s political spectrum, reflecting Vargas Lleras’ decades-long influence. Former presidents Juan Manuel Santos, with whom Vargas Lleras served as vice president, Ernesto Samper, and Iván Duque were present, along with senator Paloma Valencia and former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez, whose attendance underscored the respect afforded to Vargas Lleras despite years of sharp public disputes between the two men.

Vargas Lleras died Friday in Bogotá after a prolonged battle with cancer. He was 64. His death ends a political career spanning more than three decades as senator, minister, vice president, and two-time presidential candidate.

Born in Bogotá on February 19, 1962, Vargas Lleras came from one of Colombia’s most prominent political dynasties. His grandfather, former President Carlos Lleras Restrepo, was a leading figure of the Liberal Party.

He built his own career as a city councilman, congressman, minister, and ultimately leader of the Cambio Radical party. His first presidential run came in 2010, where he finished third with nearly 1.5 million votes. Though unsuccessful, the campaign positioned him as a national force.

President Santos later appointed him to his cabinet, and in 2014 selected him as his running mate for reelection. The pair won in the runoff, and Vargas Lleras assumed office as vice president on August 7 that year.

He ran again for president in 2018 under the “Mejor Vargas Lleras” coalition, focusing on infrastructure, housing and administrative reform. He finished fourth in the first round and did not advance to the runoff.

Throughout his career, Vargas Lleras survived two assassination attempts and weathered political scandals, including accusations linked to parapolitics investigations, though he was never formally charged.

In later years, his health increasingly limited his public life. He was diagnosed with a benign meningioma in 2016 after a fainting episode, and in recent years battled cancer while largely stepping back from frontline politics.

Even as his public appearances became rare, his influence endured. Monday’s funeral made clear that, in death as in life, Germán Vargas Lleras remained a central figure in Colombia’s political history.

Colombian politician Germán Vargas Lleras died Friday in the capital Bogotá, according to Semana magazine. His death brings an end to a political career spanning more than 30 years, including as a senator, minister, vice president, and two-time presidential candidate. 

On Monday, Vargas Lleras was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit at the Luis Carlos Sarmiento Angulo Cancer Treatment and Research Center in Bogotá. He was later transferred to another hospital where he lost a battle with cancer he had been fighting for years. He was 64 years old. 

Political career

Born in Bogotá on February 19, 1962, Vargas Lleras grew up in a political family. His grandfather, former President Carlos Lleras Restrepo, was a pillar of the country’s Liberal Party. 

He would go on to make a name for himself on his own, serving as a city councilman, congressman, minister, and ultimately leader of the Cambio Radical political party.

Vargas Lleras first ran for president 2009. He traveled the country, participated in debates, and garnered nearly 1.5 million votes. It wasn’t enough to win, but he finished third. 

The winner of the election, Juan Manuel Santos, would later call on him to serve as a minister in his cabinet. 

In 2014, Santos chose him as his running mate for reelection. Together they won in the runoff, and Vargas Lleras took office as vice president on August 7 of that year. 

Once his term as vice president ended, Vargas Lleras did not sit idle. In 2018, he ran again for president, this time with the “Mejor Vargas Lleras” coalition backed by Cambio Radical. 

His policy proposals included  infrastructure, housing, and a more efficient public administration.

In the first round, he received over 1.4 million votes but finished fourth, knocking him out of the runoff race. His campaign stated that he would not officially endorse either of the remaining candidates, Iván Duque and Gustavo Petro. 

Over time, he kept a lower profile, though he never completely stepped away from politics.

During his career, Vargas Lleras would survive two assassination attempts and a “parapolitics” scandal in which he was accused, but never charged, with benefitting politically from his connections to warlord “Martin Llanos”.

Health issues

In his later years, his health gradually got in the way of politics; reportedly, he suffered from a benign meningioma, a tumor in the membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord, which was detected in 2016 after a fainting spell. 

On March 11, former President Álvaro Uribe commented on his condition, saying, “My best wishes for the health of Dr. Germán Vargas Lleras, a distinguished patriot whom I respect despite our occasional disagreements.”

During his final months, the former vice president stayed out of the public eye, though he briefly reappeared on March 3  in a video concerning the March 8 parliamentary elections. 

Upon learning of his death, former President Santos wrote on X that he is “deeply saddened” and described Vargas Lleras as “an exceptional colleague.”

Current President Gustavo Petro also mourned the political leader’s death: “Both in the Senate and on the campaign trail, he behaved like a gladiator. As someone who often disagreed with him, I regret that his seriousness in debate will be lost,” he said on his X account.

Featured image: Germán Vargas Lleras

Image credit: Germán Vargas Lleras via Facebook.

This article originally appeared on Latin America Reports and was republished with permission.

The post Germán Vargas Lleras, Colombia’s former vice president and two-time presidential candidate, has died appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

A landmark ruling by the Superior Tribunal of Bogotá has delivered one of the strongest judicial rebukes yet of the narrative surrounding Colombia’s 2021 National Strike, concluding that some of the most destructive episodes of violence during the protests were not spontaneous acts of social unrest but part of a coordinated criminal strategy involving illegal armed groups.

The decision, issued by the Criminal Chamber of the tribunal under magistrate Jaime Andrés Velasco Velasco Muñoz, found that several of those prosecuted for violent acts in the capital maintained operational ties with cells linked to the Second Manuel Marulanda Vélez, a dissident faction of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia –  FARC.

For years, much of the public debate framed the violence of the so-called Paro Nacional as the uncontrolled overflow of legitimate citizen protests sparked by social inequality, police abuse, unemployment and widespread anger over the government of then-President Iván Duque.

But after reviewing wiretaps, surveillance records, testimonies and digital communications, the court concluded that several of the attacks that paralyzed Bogotá followed a clear operational structure, with leadership roles, territorial coordination and instructions issued in advance.

According to the ruling, some defendants acted in coordination with illegal armed actors to organize attacks on police command posts, TransMilenio stations, commercial establishments and strategic road corridors across the capital.

“For the magistrates, these were not isolated or improvised actions,” the ruling stated. “There existed an organized structure with assigned functions, defined leadership and a chain of command.”

The 2021 protests initially erupted after Duque introduced a controversial tax reform proposal during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. The measure, widely criticized for placing additional burdens on the middle and working classes during an economic crisis, quickly ignited nationwide demonstrations.

Although the government later withdrew the reform, the protests escalated into weeks of nationwide unrest, marked by deadly confrontations between demonstrators and security forces, the burning of police stations, attacks on public transport infrastructure and prolonged road blockades that crippled supply chains across Colombia.

In Bogotá alone, dozens of TransMilenio stations were vandalized or destroyed, CAI neighborhood police posts were torched, and mobility across major avenues such as Las Américas, Carrera Séptima and Autonorte was severely disrupted.

Elsewhere, especially in southwestern Colombia, blockades led to shortages of fuel, medical oxygen and basic food supplies, with business leaders warning of millions of dollars in economic losses and humanitarian consequences for vulnerable communities.

The tribunal’s ruling argues that at least part of that violence was not the natural escalation of protest, but the result of deliberate planning.

Investigators identified several WhatsApp groups allegedly used to coordinate simultaneous actions across the city. Among the names cited in the judicial file were groups linked to strategic corridors such as “Américas,” “Carrera Séptima,” “Autonorte,” “Autosur” and “Caracas.”

According to prosecutors, these digital channels were used to organize blockades, assign responsibilities and plan attacks against public infrastructure.

The court also found that some young defendants had been tasked with recruiting new members and expanding influence within university environments, both public and private, strengthening support networks and facilitating operational logistics.

One of the most significant findings involved intercepted communications that allegedly referenced support from higher-ranking commanders connected to FARC dissidents.

For the magistrates, this reinforced the conclusion that there was external coordination behind the violence, rather than a purely spontaneous citizen uprising.

The ruling now sharply challenges the long-promoted narrative of the unrest as exclusively peaceful social protest and instead reframes part of the National Strike as coordinated urban sabotage carried out under the cover of legitimate public discontent.

It also revives scrutiny of the national strike committee and senior left-wing political leaders, including current President Gustavo Petro, who strongly supported the demonstrations and positioned himself as one of the loudest critics of Duque’s handling of both the protests and the pandemic.

Critics argue that political backing from opposition leaders helped legitimize actions that moved far beyond peaceful protest, allowing criminal actors to operate behind the shield of social mobilization while deepening institutional instability.

The protests also unfolded at one of the most fragile moments of the COVID-19 emergency, when Colombia was still facing high ICU occupancy, strict mobility restrictions and biosecurity measures intended to limit mass contagion.

Large demonstrations and road blockades directly violated those restrictions, and critics maintain that the protests contributed to additional infections and unnecessary strain on an already overwhelmed public health system.

For opponents of Petro and sectors of the business community, the ruling is less a revelation than a delayed institutional acknowledgment of what many citizens experienced firsthand: burned police stations, destroyed public transport, food shortages and entire cities brought to a standstill.

After evaluating the full body of evidence, the court sentenced three of the principal defendants to 19 years in prison for terrorism and criminal conspiracy. A fourth defendant received a 10-year prison sentence.

The tribunal also imposed fines exceeding 1 billion pesos, reflecting the severe damage caused to both public and private infrastructure.

Far from closing the chapter on the National Strike, the ruling reopens one of Colombia’s deepest political wounds: whether the country witnessed a legitimate social uprising, or whether parts of it were, from the beginning, a calculated strategy of destabilization supported by organized criminal networks.

For many Colombians, the answer may shape how the country remembers 2021—and who must ultimately be held responsible.

With just over a month to go before Colombia’s May 31 presidential election, a new Invamer poll suggests the race has narrowed to three viable contenders, as left-wing senator Iván Cepeda strengthens his lead and two right-wing rivals battle for a place in the runoff.

The survey, conducted for Noticias Caracol and Blu Radio, shows Cepeda commanding 44.3% of voting intention, a significant jump from 37.1% in February. The Pacto Histórico candidate has not only consolidated support among core voters but expanded his appeal across all regions, with particularly strong gains among younger voters aged 20 to 30.

Trailing behind, but still within striking distance of a second-round berth, are Abelardo de la Espriella with 21.5% and Paloma Valencia with 19.8%. While De la Espriella has posted modest gains since February, Valencia has emerged as the fastest-rising candidate, nearly doubling her support from 10% in the previous poll.

The data underscores a central dynamic shaping the race: a fragmented right competing for a single runoff slot, even as the left coalesces behind a dominant frontrunner. According to the data, as long as the right remains divided, any division among the pro-Uribe camps will continue to benefit Cepeda. Unless there is a clear consolidation after May 31, the numbers suggest the second round will be a contest over who faces the hard-leftist and not whether he gets to the final run-off.

The collapse of Colombia’s political center has been equally striking. Former Bogotá mayor Claudia López has seen her support plunge from 11.7% to 3.6%, while former Medellín mayor Sergio Fajardo has dropped from 6.6% to just 2.5%. Both candidates have lost more than half of their previous backing and now poll well below the 4% threshold required for state reimbursement of campaign expenses.

López’s decline appears particularly acute in urban constituencies, where she previously drew strong support, including among progressive and LGBTQ voters, pointing to a broader erosion of her core base. Fajardo, meanwhile, continues to struggle to regain traction, reflecting persistent voter dissatisfaction with centrist alternatives.

Analysts are also seeing how centrist voters are shifting toward Valencia, whose ticket includes former DANE statistics chief Juan Daniel Oviedo as the vice-presidential option. Oviedo appears to be decisive in broadening Valencia’s appeal beyond the Centro Democrático base.

Despite Cepeda’s commanding first-round lead, runoff scenarios suggest a more competitive contest – particularly if Valencia secures the second spot. In a hypothetical second round between Cepeda and De la Espriella, the left-wing candidate would win with 54.6% against 42.6%. However, against Valencia, the margin narrows significantly to 51.2% versus 46.6%.

That tightening gap reflects Valencia’s growing ability to attract support beyond her base, including voters from the political center and segments of the undecided electorate. According to the poll, she outperforms De la Espriella in capturing second-choice preferences, positioning her as the more competitive challenger in a potential runoff.

When respondents were asked who they would support if their first-choice candidate failed to advance, Cepeda led with 26.7%, followed closely by Valencia at 25.7%, with De la Espriella trailing at 19.8%. López and Fajardo lagged further behind, reinforcing their diminished relevance in the race.

Cepeda’s dominance, however, is not without warning signs. While he continues to lead comfortably, his projected runoff margins have narrowed compared to earlier surveys, particularly against Valencia. The erosion suggests that while his base remains solid, opposition voters may be coalescing more effectively than before.

For now, the trajectory is clear. Cepeda has gained ground nationally despite a worsening security situation and poll conducted before the terrorist bomb on Saturday, April 25 by FARC dissidents along the Pan-American highway in which 20 persons were killed.

With less than a month until Colombians head to the polls, the race appears increasingly defined not by a crowded field, but by a three-way struggle – one frontrunner and two challengers vying for the chance to stop him.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro will meet Venezuela’s interim leader Delcy Rodríguez in Caracas on Friday to address security challenges along the shared border, marking their first official encounter since Nicolás Maduro was captured by U.S special forces on January 3, 2026.

The meeting, to be held at the Miraflores presidential palace, is expected to center on coordination between the two countries to tackle armed groups, drug trafficking and other cross-border threats that have long destabilized frontier regions.

Colombia’s presidency said the talks aim to “strengthen bilateral cooperation, territorial control and coordination on security matters,” following the cancellation of a previous meeting scheduled for March 13 at the border due to security concerns cited by Caracas.

Friday’s talks come after Rodríguez assumed power earlier this year following the capture of former Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro during Operation Absolute Resolve.

Petro is expected to travel to Caracas after holding meetings earlier in Bogotá. The leaders will first hold a private discussion to outline joint actions addressing border instability, followed by a broader metting between their respective delegations aimed at formalizing institutional commitments.

Officials from both countries are also expected to sign the final act of the III Commission on Neighborhood and Integration, with foreign ministers participating, before delivering statements to the media.

The Colombia–Venezuela border stretches more than 2,200 kilometers (1,367 miles) from the Caribbean coast to the Amazon basin and has long been a hotspot for illegal activity, including the presence of the National Liberation Army (ELN) guerrilla, as well as drug trafficking and smuggling networks.

Petro said earlier this week that the talks would place particular emphasis on the Catatumbo region, one of the most volatile areas along the frontier, where violence linked to armed groups and illicit economies has intensified.

“If we go, Catatumbo is a key issue to discuss with President Delcy,” Petro said during a cabinet meeting on April 21, adding that his delegation would include military and police officials to coordinate security strategies.

He said the goal is to develop a joint security plan, improve coordination between the two countries’ armed forces and police, and deepen intelligence-sharing, warning that a lack of cooperation could lead to operations that harm civilian populations.

The meeting also comes against the backdrop of a rebound in bilateral trade between the two countries following years of strained relations.

Trade flows have increased significantly in recent years, rising from around US$200 million three years ago to more than $1 billion, representing an increase of roughly 600%, according to official figures.

Colombia recorded a trade surplus of US$1 billion with Venezuela in 2025, underscoring the economic incentives for both governments to maintain stable ties despite ongoing political uncertainties.

Petro first announced the trip last week during an interview in Spain, referencing the earlier failed meeting and signaling his willingness to travel to Caracas to advance talks.

The visit marks a key test of Colombia’s role in engaging with Venezuela’s transitional leadership, as both countries seek to stabilize their shared border while cautiously rebuilding diplomatic and economic relations in the post-Maduro era.

Bogotá, Colombia – Leftist presidential candidate Iván Cepeda challenged his opponents to a debate on Saturday after turning down previous proposals to face-off with his rivals.

“I challenge the far right, its two candidates – Senator Paloma Valencia and lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella – to a debate,” Cepeda told a crowd at a rally in Fusagasugá, a city near Bogotá. 

His opponents responded by accepting the proposal, while also highlighting that they had been calling for a debate for months.

The possibility of a live face-off between candidates has been a recurring theme ahead of first-round presidential elections on May 31.

Shortly after beginning his candidacy last year, Cepeda dismissed the idea of participating in a debate: “I’m not going to take part in debates—let me make this clear from the outset—to exchange insults with other candidates, or to threaten one another, or to denigrate one another.”

Cepeda’s rivals have repeatedly criticized him for refusing to spar with them on the public stage, something they highlighted following the leftist candidate’s U-turn on Saturday.

“Allow me to correct you: you’re not issuing a challenge; you’re accepting the challenge you were invited to take up months ago,” said criminal defense attorney de la Espriella.

Valencia, the candidate for the Centro Democrático (Democratic Center) party, also seized the opportunity to pounce on Cepeda: “A few weeks ago, it was I who challenged Iván Cepeda several times to a face-to-face debate, yet you chose to hide away in the Senate with a controlled microphone.”

She suggested that Cepeda’s U-turn owes to a worsening performance in recent polls: “Now that the polls are tightening, you’re coming out of Fusagasugá with this challenge.”

Analysts agreed with Valencia’s suggestion, saying that Cepeda’s debate proposal is an attempt to inject life into a stagnating campaign. 

“Cepeda has offered to debate because of his campaign’s inherent lack of momentum and general weakness. He is not captivating any new voters or finding a tangible way of changing the narrative in his favor,” Sergio Guzmán, Director at Colombia Risk Analysis, a political risk consultancy, told Latin America Reports. 

Internal party polls reportedly show sluggish growth in Cepeda’s polling numbers since he became the official candidate for the Pacto Histórico (Historic Pact) in October. 

Meanwhile, Valencia has been soaring in the polls following her victory in presidential primaries in March; Cepeda and de la Espriella did not partake.

But the debate is not without risk for Cepeda, according to Guzmán: “Cepeda runs the risk of having to go on the defensive of Petro and his administration.”

Others believe that Cepeda’s oratory style does not lend itself to the televised debate format.

“He has a much more academic tendency, which is not so typical in politics, let alone in modern politics,” noted Miguel Jaramillo Luján, a Colombian political strategist. In contrast, he noted that de la Espriella and Valencia have a more media-savvy communication style.

Nevertheless, the analyst told Latin America Reports that Cepeda’s debate style could give him the chance to woo crucial centrist voters: “I believe he can inspire confidence and credibility among his target audience and even among the centre, particularly when it comes to dispelling certain myths and lies that have been spread by the centre and the right.”

With the leading candidates agreeing to debate, the battle over the specifics – including moderators, questions, and location – begins. 

The post Colombia elections: candidates set for debate after Cepeda backtracks appeared first on The Bogotá Post.

Fresh audio revelations broadcast by Noticias Caracol have triggered a political storm in Colombia, implicating senior government-linked figures in alleged secret contacts with one of the country’s most notorious smugglers, Diego Marín Buitrago.

The recordings, aired late on April 5, appear to document meetings between intermediaries connected to President Gustavo Petro and the legal representative of Marín, widely known by the alias “Papá Pitufo.” The revelations come with just over four months remaining in Petro’s presidential term, intensifying scrutiny over his administration.

According to the report, the audios – lasting more than 90 minutes – capture conversations from early 2025 involving at least four individuals allegedly acting as emissaries of the government. Among them is Jorge Lemus, the former head of the National Intelligence Directorate (DNI), as well as other figures with links to the administration.

In the recordings, Lemus is heard holding closed-door meetings with Marín’s lawyer, Luis Felipe Ramírez, in which possible judicial benefits and guarantees are discussed in exchange for cooperation. Such proposals, if confirmed, would fall outside the remit of intelligence officials and raise questions about potential overreach and irregular negotiations.

The audios also suggest that these contacts occurred before any formal intervention by judicial authorities, with intermediaries allegedly presenting themselves as acting on behalf of the executive branch. Additional names mentioned include Catalan political figures Xavier Vendrell and Ramón Devesa, as well as former financial intelligence adviser Isaac Beltrán.

The revelations have revived a long-running controversy over alleged links between Marín and Petro’s 2022 presidential campaign. Previous reports indicated that the smuggler may have contributed 500 million pesos (approximately $130,000) to the campaign—funds Petro has said were returned upon discovery of their origin. However, opposition figures argue that no conclusive proof of that վերադարձ has ever been presented.

Opposition leaders, including senator and presidential hopeful Paloma Valencia, seized on the latest disclosures to demand an independent investigation. “This is an extremely serious institutional matter,” Valencia said in a video response, questioning the absence of evidence regarding the alleged վերադարձ of the funds and warning of a pattern of clandestine contacts.

Critics argue that the recordings point to “under-the-table” dealings with criminal actors, potentially undermining the government’s legitimacy at a critical political juncture.

President Petro responded by acknowledging that intelligence contacts with Marín’s circle had taken place but insisted they were authorized and aimed solely at securing the smuggler’s cooperation with Colombian justice.

“The purpose was to bring Marín to Colombia,” Petro said, framing the outreach as part of a broader strategy to dismantle criminal networks. However, the president went further, alleging that some intelligence agents may have exploited the situation by attempting to solicit money during the interactions.

According to Petro, these alleged irregularities led to dismissals within state agencies, suggesting internal misconduct rather than a coordinated government effort to negotiate with the smuggler.

The president also criticized the Fiscalía General de la Nación, accusing prosecutors of limiting the scope of investigations and pursuing what he described as a politically motivated campaign against his administration.

Marín, long considered one of Colombia’s most significant contraband operators, has been linked for decades to networks involved in smuggling and bribery. His arrest in Europe in 2024 triggered an ongoing extradition process, though legal challenges in countries including Spain and Portugal have complicated proceedings.

Prosecutors in Colombia have charged him with criminal conspiracy and bribery, alleging he led a sophisticated structure that penetrated state institutions.

The latest revelations add to mounting political pressure on Petro, whose administration has already faced a series of scandals and internal fractures. With the presidential term nearing its end, the emergence of recorded evidence – rather than testimony or second-hand accounts—marks a potentially decisive moment in a controversy that has shadowed his government for years.

Whether the audios lead to formal investigations or judicial consequences remains unclear. But politically, the damage appears immediate, reopening questions about the boundaries between state actors and criminal networks—and the extent to which those lines may have been blurred behind closed doors.