The question "when do I need a criminal defense lawyer" almost always comes too late: when there is already an arrest, a summons from the Fiscalía or an imputación under way. From the perspective of the person under investigation, the useful answer is not a speech about the importance of a defense, but a map. In Colombian criminal proceedings there are specific moments at which having or not having defense counsel changes the outcome in a way that is almost irreversible.
This article is a decision guide. It walks through the adversarial criminal process governed by Ley 906 de 2004, marking those points of no return —the interview, the indagación (the preliminary inquiry stage), the arrest, the imputación, the acceptance of charges, the medida de aseguramiento— and explains what is at stake for you at each one, what time you have and what rights you can exercise. It is not a catalog of abstract reasons: it is a walk through the clock of the process, so that you know where you stand.
It does not seek to replace a lawyer's advice on your specific case; no guide can do that. Its purpose is that you recognize the moment you are in and understand why, in criminal matters, acting in time weighs as much as being right. It is written in the formal "usted" and without dramatics, because informed composure is, very often, the first tool of defense.
The essentials in five points
- The decisions that most define a criminal case —remaining at liberty, accepting or not accepting the charges— are not taken at trial, but at preliminary hearings that take place within a matter of hours. Arriving at them without defense counsel means giving up the chance to intervene when your situation is being decided.
- If you are summoned to an interview or to questioning, the practical rule is simple: remain silent and do not give any statement without having first spoken with your lawyer (arts. 8 and 282 of Ley 906 de 2004; art. 33 of the Constitución).
- If you are arrested, a 36-hour window applies for bringing you before a juez de control de garantías (art. 28 of the Constitución; arts. 297 and 302 of Ley 906 de 2004). It is the most decisive stretch and the one that costs most when faced without a defense.
- Accepting the charges reduces the sentence, but it amounts to convicting yourself: up to half at the imputación and only a quarter if there was flagrancia (art. 351 of Ley 906 de 2004; art. 57 of Ley 1453 de 2011). It should never be decided in the heat of the moment.
- Being placed under a medida de aseguramiento does not make you guilty: the presumption of innocence still applies and pretrial detention is the exception, not the rule (arts. 295 and 308).
The adversarial criminal justice system, in one minute: why the "when" decides almost everything
Since 2005 Colombia has operated an adversarial criminal justice system governed by Ley 906 de 2004. Three roles matter and should not be confused. The Fiscalía General de la Nación investigates and prosecutes. The juez de control de garantías oversees, at the early stage, that your fundamental rights are respected: it authorizes or reviews arrests, searches and measures affecting you. And the juez de conocimiento conducts the trial and delivers the judgment. That the one who investigates you is not the one who judges you is, precisely, a guarantee in your favor.
The key to the "when" is this: the decisions that weigh most in a criminal case are not taken at trial, months later, but at preliminary hearings that sometimes take place in a single day. In those hearings —legalization of the arrest, imputación and the measure— it may be decided whether you await the proceedings at liberty and whether you keep your right to a trial. That is why arriving at them without defense counsel is not a minor oversight: it is staying silent when it matters most to speak through a professional.
The Constitución recognizes, from before any conviction, your presumption of innocence and your right to a lawyer throughout the investigation and the trial. That right is not born with the judgment: it is born much earlier, with the first act that involves you. And the burden of proving your responsibility is not yours: it falls on the criminal prosecution body, and doubt is resolved in your favor (art. 7 of Ley 906 de 2004).
Moment 1. If you are summoned to an interview or to questioning: first, remain silent
Receiving a summons from the Fiscalía or from the policía judicial for an "interview" or for "questioning of an indiciado" usually awakens the impulse to go and clear everything up as soon as possible, and alone. It is, frequently, the first mistake. What you say at that moment is not forgotten: it is placed on record and can steer the whole investigation against you.
The law requires that, before questioning you, you be warned that you have the right to remain silent and not to testify against yourself or against your close relatives. Questioning is neither compulsory nor automatic: it proceeds only if you, once warned, decide to speak; and if you do, you have the right to be assisted by a lawyer. The Constitución backs you up: no one is obliged to testify against themselves or against their spouse, permanent partner or close relatives within the degrees set by law (art. 33).
What is at stake here is more than it seems. A statement given without preparation can fix dates, admit facts or open lines of investigation that cannot later be closed. Remaining silent is not an indication of guilt and cannot be used against you: the right of defense includes not incriminating yourself, not being compelled to give a statement and having your silence not construed as an admission of responsibility (art. 8 of Ley 906 de 2004). And it also includes private communication with your defense counsel before appearing before the authorities.
Think of an ordinary case. You are called in "just for an interview, it will be quick" over a business dispute that ended in a complaint. You go without a lawyer and, to "show that you have nothing to hide", you recount meetings, figures and messages. Without meaning to, you hand over the map of the investigation and admit facts which, wrongly framed, fit an offense. With prior advice you would have understood what is being asked of you, what it is advisable to say and what to hold back.
What your lawyer does at this point: analyzes the summons and finds out in what capacity you are being called; explains the real scope of remaining silent or of giving a statement; prepares, if giving a statement is advisable, a precise and well-supported version; and accompanies you to the proceeding. The most common mistakes are going alone, "clearing everything up" without knowing what is being investigated, showing documents without any filter and believing that the official's friendliness changes the rules of the game. It does not change them. The rule fits in one line: do not give any statement without having first spoken with your defense counsel.
Moment 2. If you learn that you are being investigated or a complaint arrives: act before the imputación
There is a stage that many fail to use: the indagación. It is the time during which the Fiscalía finds out whether there is merit to bring an imputación and in which you are not yet formally an imputado. Learning that you are being investigated —or that a complaint has been filed against you— is no reason to wait: it is the signal to prepare, while the process is not yet running against the clock.
The law is explicit that a person who has not been imputado also has powers. They may seek advice from a lawyer and, with that lawyer, search for, identify and collect evidence, have it examined by private experts and conduct interviews useful for their defense, and then use them before the authorities. In other words: the defense can begin to be built before the Fiscalía takes the first formal step.
What is at stake: the strength of your defense. What is documented in time —a contract, a proof of payment, the testimony of someone who was present— is usually stronger than what is improvised later, when memory and documents scatter. An example: you are told that a complaint has been filed against you for estafa (fraud) —an offense punishable by two to eight years' imprisonment (art. 246 of the Código Penal)— over a deal that, on your account, was a civil breach and not a deception. If you gather now the emails, the contract and the payments that show your good faith, your defense starts from facts; if you wait for the imputación, it starts from explanations.
It is worth not confusing a complaint with a case: it is a noticia criminal, not a conviction, and many end up shelved. But neither should it be underestimated. What your lawyer does here: assesses the complaint and the likely legal characterization, secures exculpatory evidence before it is lost, defines a strategy and, where appropriate, engages with the Fiscalía. The typical mistake has two faces: the person who panics and acts on their own —even contacting the victim or the witnesses, which can worsen their situation— and the person who ignores it until the summons arrives.
It is worth distinguishing your place in the story. If you are on the other side —if you are the victim weighing whether to file a complaint— that is a different route, which we address in a guide for victims of a crime; if your question is how to choose the person who will represent you, we deal with that in how to choose a criminal defense lawyer; and if you are not the person under investigation but a third party who learned of a possible offense, your situation and your duties are different and we look at them in what to do if you learn of a crime.
Moment 3. Arrest in flagrancia or by court order and the 36-hour window
In Colombia the deprivation of liberty has, in principle, two legitimate routes. The first is arrest by court order: a juez de control de garantías, at the Fiscalía's request, issues a written order where there are reasonably well-founded grounds to infer that you are the perpetrator or a participant. The second is flagrancia: where the person is surprised and apprehended during the commission of the offense or immediately afterwards, or is identified by the victim or by another person, or is found with objects or traces revealing that they have just committed it (art. 301).
Whichever the route, a constitutional limit applies that you should know by heart: the person arrested must be brought before a juez de control de garantías within the following 36 hours. Within that period the preliminary hearings are held, frequently one after another: the legalization of the arrest, the formulation of the imputación and, if the Fiscalía requests it, the application for a medida de aseguramiento.
The law also recognizes, at the moment of arrest, rights that it is advisable to exercise: to be informed of the act attributed to you and of who ordered the arrest; to name the person who is to be told of your apprehension; to remain silent, knowing that what you say may be used against you; and to appoint and meet with a lawyer of your own choosing as soon as possible or, if you cannot, to receive the defense of the sistema nacional de defensoría pública (the national public defender system) (art. 303).
An example of flagrancia: you are apprehended after being identified by someone who claims that you have just committed a theft, and within a few hours there may be a hearing. If no one checks that the arrest complied with the law, that your rights were read to you and that the time limit is respected, those defects can go unnoticed. With defense counsel, the legalization hearing stops being a formality: it is the first opportunity —sometimes the best— to challenge the lawfulness of everything that follows.
What your lawyer does in this window: verifies the lawfulness of the arrest and of the warrant; checks that your rights were explained and respected; monitors strict compliance with the 36 hours; and prepares, in record time, the defense against the imputación and against a possible precautionary measure. The costliest mistakes are trying to "explain yourself" to the police without a lawyer, signing what you do not understand, handing over your phone and your passwords without advice, and trusting informal promises that "cooperating" will get you released. That window is short and high-impact: it is often the moment when the absence of defense counsel is paid for most dearly.
Moment 4. The formulación de imputación: what it is and what is at stake
The formulación de imputación is the act by which the Fiscalía notifies you, before the juez de control de garantías (the judge who oversees constitutional guarantees at the pretrial stage), that you are an imputado (a person formally charged). It is neither a conviction nor proof of guilt: it is a formal notice of charges. But it has real consequences, because from that point the case gains pace, the time limits leading to the formal accusation begin to run, and the limitation period for the criminal action is interrupted (art. 292).
The Fiscalía brings the imputación when, from the elementos materiales probatorios (the items of physical evidence) and the information lawfully obtained, it can reasonably infer that you are the perpetrator or a participant (art. 287). And it must do so with precise content, not with generalities: it has to identify you individually and give you a clear and succinct account of the legally relevant facts, in comprehensible language, and inform you of the possibility of accepting that imputación with the sentence reduction under article 351.
What is at stake: the exact understanding of the charge and the ground on which everything else will be fought. The legal characterization —the name of the offense and its aggravating factors— determines the sentence at stake, whether the offense is querellable, and even whether negotiating is advisable. Being charged with simple theft is not the same as being charged with aggravated theft, nor is a small-value fraud the same as one with circumstances of greater punishability; the difference is measured in years and in options.
What your lawyer does here: listens closely to the account of the facts and to the legal characterization; verifies that the imputación is clear, comprehensible and legally sustainable; notes the weaknesses in the Fiscalía's case; and —the crucial point— prevents you from deciding to accept the charges at that same hearing and without preparation. That is the true point of no return. The frequent mistake is to nod along to what you do not understand, or to respond immediately to the offer of a reduction out of the relief of "finally knowing what this is about".
Moment 5. The most critical moment: before accepting the charges or entering an allanamiento
Here, for the person under investigation, is the point of no return. Right after the imputación, the option of accepting the charges —the allanamiento a cargos (acceptance of the charges)— may arise, in exchange for a sentence reduction. The law provides that acceptance at the formulación de imputación entails a reduction of up to half of the applicable sentence.
The reduction is real, but so is its cost. Accepting the charges is equivalent to a judgment of conviction and to waiving the trial and the right to challenge the evidence against you. It is not a formality: in practice, it is a declaration of responsibility. And there is a further warning that many overlook: once the judge accepts the allanamiento after verifying that it was free, informed and voluntary, withdrawal is not available unless it is shown that your consent was vitiated or that your fundamental guarantees were violated (art. 293). In other words, it is not a decision that can be undone out of regret.
There is also a financial nuance. Where the offense produced an increase in assets, the law conditions agreements with the Fiscalía on the return of at least fifty percent of the value of that increase, and on securing the remainder (art. 349). That factor can change the calculation of what is advisable entirely.
An example. You are charged with an offense carrying a sentence of, say, four to nine years, and you are offered a reduction for accepting the charges. In the heat of the moment, "half" sounds like a solution. But only your defense counsel can tell you whether the evidence is as solid as it appears, whether the legal characterization is correct or inflated, what the realistic sentence would be once the statutory ranges are applied, and whether a preacuerdo or the trial offers a better outcome. If the arrest was made in flagrancia, the reduction is not half but a quarter, and the calculation changes again.
What your lawyer does: turns an emotional decision into a cold calculation. Studies the strength of the evidence, reviews the legal characterization, projects the likely sentence, compares the allanamiento with the other available options and explains to you, without embellishment, what you gain and what you lose with each one. The irreversible mistake is to accept charges that do not match what happened, or to do so without weighing the reduction —believing that "this way it will be over sooner"— in an offense where there may have been a defense. Of all the decisions along this path, this is the hardest to reverse.
Moment 6. The medida de aseguramiento: the hearing where your liberty is decided
After the imputación, the Fiscalía may request a medida de aseguramiento (a precautionary measure, which may include pretrial detention). At that hearing it is decided whether you will await the proceedings at liberty, subject to obligations, or deprived of it. The presence of your defense counsel is not optional: the law requires it as a condition for the hearing to be valid (art. 306). Without technical defense there is no valid hearing; with it, there is someone to argue what is at stake.
The measures are divided into custodial ones —pretrial detention in a place of confinement or at the person's residence— and non-custodial ones —periodic reporting, a ban on leaving the country or the locality, electronic monitoring, a ban on communicating with specified persons, a bond, among others (art. 307)—. The law treats deprivation of liberty as exceptional, not as the rule: it provides that such measures are exceptional in nature and must be construed restrictively, and be necessary, appropriate, proportionate and reasonable (art. 295).
What is at stake is obvious: your liberty during proceedings that may last months or years. But one point that many misread is worth underlining: having a medida de aseguramiento imposed on you does not mean that you are guilty. The presumption of innocence still governs, and the measure is precautionary, not an advance penalty. The law also sets a time limit: as a rule, custodial measures may not exceed one year, except for the extensions expressly provided for (art. 307, parágrafo 1).
An example: the Fiscalía requests pretrial detention, arguing almost solely the seriousness of the offense. A technical defense shows that you have arraigo —a home, a job, a family—, that there is no real risk of flight or of obstruction, and that a non-custodial measure is enough to secure your appearance. The difference between awaiting the proceedings inside or outside may turn on that argument.
What your lawyer does here: argues whether the requirements of article 308 are genuinely met; produces evidence of arraigo and of low dangerousness; proposes non-custodial measures as a sufficient alternative; and, if the measure is imposed, monitors the grounds for release and the time limit. The common mistake is to arrive at this hearing without material proving arraigo, or to believe that asserting innocence is enough: what the judge weighs here is not so much guilt as the precautionary purposes.
Moment 7. Ways out of the proceedings: preacuerdos and the principio de oportunidad
Not every criminal case ends in a trial. There are ways out that, properly assessed, may suit the person under investigation, and all of them require legal judgment so as not to trade one problem for another. Knowing them widens your options; using them without calculation may close doors.
Preacuerdos are negotiations between the Fiscalía and you, with your defense counsel, about the charges and their punitive consequences. The law sets legitimate purposes for them: to humanize the proceedings and the penalty, to obtain prompt justice, to resolve the conflict generated by the offense, to encourage reparation and to secure your participation in the definition of the case (art. 348). In practice, a preacuerdo may consist of your accepting responsibility in exchange for the Fiscalía dropping an aggravating factor or a charge, or characterizing the conduct so as to reduce the sentence (art. 350).
The principio de oportunidad is different: it is a discretionary power of the Fiscalía to suspend, interrupt or waive criminal prosecution in the cases the law authorizes, always subject to the State's criminal policy (arts. 321 to 323). It is not a right you can demand, but it is a possibility your defense counsel may raise and support where the case fits the statutory grounds.
An example: in a minor offense, with reparation to the victim and no prior record, your defense counsel may explore a preacuerdo that reduces the legal characterization, or argue before the Fiscalía for the application of the principio de oportunidad. The decision to negotiate, however, is never automatic: it depends on the evidence, on the sentence at stake and on whether the negotiated outcome genuinely improves on the result of going to trial. What your lawyer does: assesses whether your case admits these options, negotiates on terms that favor you, and avoids agreements that sound like immediate relief but cost more in the long run.
These options take on their own nuances when the party under investigation is a company or its directors and officers (criminal liability of directors and officers) or where the matter involves financial crimes or cybercrimes and Ley 1273; and prevention through criminal compliance is a separate conversation, one worth having before any proceedings exist.
Moment 8. Querellable offenses: conciliation, withdrawal and lapse of the querella
There are offenses that the law reserves to the victim's initiative and does not prosecute ex officio: the querellables. Among them, injuria and calumnia (insult and false accusation of a crime), simple theft and small-value fraud, breach of trust or damage to another's property (art. 74). An offense being querellable opens up, for you, ways out that do not exist in offenses prosecuted ex officio.
In these cases conciliation is not optional: it is a procedural prerequisite. Before the criminal action can be brought, conciliation must be attempted before the prosecutor, a conciliation center or a recognized conciliator; if there is an agreement, the proceedings are shelved (art. 522). For you, this means that certain proceedings can end by agreement, without reaching trial and without a criminal record.
What is at stake: the possibility of an early and less onerous way out. An example: a complaint for injuria arising from a dispute with a neighbor or at work. If the offense is querellable and no exception applies, prior conciliation is mandatory; a reasonable agreement —a retraction, an apology, compensation— can close the matter. And if the complainant does not press the case forward, the law also provides for withdrawal: the querellante may withdraw before the oral trial (art. 76), and their unjustified failure to appear at the conciliation is treated as withdrawal of their claim.
What your lawyer does here: checks whether the offense is querellable and whether any exception applies; reviews whether the querella was filed within the lapse period; prepares and conducts the conciliation, seeking an agreement that protects you; and, where appropriate, invokes the lapse or the withdrawal. The frequent mistake is to try to "settle" the matter on the outside, contacting the other party directly without advice, which may blur your position or, worse, aggravate your situation. To know whether your case admits this way out, the exact legal characterization —again— is everything.
At a glance: stage, time limit, what is at stake and what your lawyer does
The following table summarizes the path; read it as a compass, not as a substitute for legal advice, since every case has nuances that become visible only with the file in hand.
| Stage / moment | Time limit or rule | What is at stake | What your lawyer does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summons to an interview or to questioning | Before making a statement; speaking is optional (arts. 8 and 282) | Remaining silent or incriminating yourself | Decides whether making a statement is advisable and prepares an account backed by evidence |
| Indagación (you know you are under investigation) | Before the imputación (art. 267) | Building the exculpatory evidence in time | Gathers evidence, conducts interviews and sets the strategy |
| Arrest (in flagrancia or under a warrant) | 36 hours to be brought before the judge (art. 28 CN; arts. 297 and 302) | The lawfulness of the arrest and your liberty | Monitors the lawfulness and the time limit; exercises your rights (art. 303) |
| Formulación de imputación | At the hearing (arts. 286-288) | Understanding the exact charge and its scope | Demands clarity about the facts and detects weaknesses |
| Acceptance of the charges (allanamiento) | After the imputación; reduction of up to ½, or ¼ in flagrancia (arts. 351 and 301) | Waiving the trial in exchange for a reduction | Weighs the evidence, the sentence and the advantage before deciding |
| Medida de aseguramiento | After the imputación; max. 1 year as a rule (arts. 306-308) | Awaiting the proceedings at liberty or deprived of it | Argues necessity and sufficiency; produces evidence of arraigo |
| Preacuerdo / principio de oportunidad | Up until before the trial (arts. 348-350 and 321-323) | Negotiated early termination of the case | Negotiates charges and sentence on favorable terms |
| Querellable offense | Querella: 6 months; prior conciliation (arts. 73, 74 and 522) | Closure by conciliation or by lapse | Conciliates, or invokes the lapse or the withdrawal |
What NOT to do: mistakes that tend to be irreversible
Much of the harm in criminal matters comes not from the offense under investigation, but from decisions made in the first few hours, out of nerves or out of misdirected good faith. These are the mistakes that, time and again, cost the most:
- Giving an account or "clearing everything up" without defense counsel. What you say is recorded and may steer the investigation against you.
- Accepting the charges in the heat of the moment. The allanamiento amounts to convicting yourself and, absent a defect of consent or a violation of guarantees, cannot be undone (art. 293).
- Signing or authorizing what you do not understand. Records, consents or disclosures of information without understanding their scope.
- Handing over your phone, your passwords or documents without legal advice. Voluntary access to your information may open up avenues of evidence that could have been avoided.
- Trusting informal promises. "Cooperate and we will let you go" is not a legal guarantee; the decisions are made by a judge.
- Tampering with, deleting or "fixing" evidence. Besides being useless, it may amount to obstruction and aggravate your situation.
- Contacting the victim or the witnesses on your own. It may be read as pressure and close off legitimate ways out such as conciliation.
- Letting the 36 hours run without a defense. It is the stretch where the lawfulness of the arrest and your liberty are decided.
- Ignoring the summonses and failing to appear. Unjustified absence may lead to the case moving forward without you (contumacia, or trial in absentia).
Common myths, and what the law actually says
Beliefs circulate around criminal proceedings that, taken seriously, lead to poor decisions. They are worth dismantling:
| Myth | Reality |
|---|---|
| "If I am innocent, I do not need a lawyer." | Innocence is presumed, but it does not defend itself: the proceedings have rules, time limits and hearings where your absence shows. Technical defense protects that presumption. |
| "Remaining silent makes me look guilty." | Silence may not be used against you or read as an admission of responsibility (art. 8; art. 33 CN). It is a right, not a confession. |
| "A complaint already means a conviction." | A complaint is a noticia criminal (the report that starts the case); many end up shelved. Between the complaint and a possible conviction lies a whole set of proceedings with guarantees. |
| "If I am charged, I have already lost." | The imputación is a notice of charges, not proof of guilt. It is the beginning of the defense, not its end. |
| "Accepting the charges is always worth it because of the reduction." | Accepting amounts to convicting yourself; in flagrancia the reduction is only a quarter (arts. 351 and 301). It is advisable only after a cold calculation. |
| "With a medida de aseguramiento I am already guilty." | The measure is precautionary and exceptional; the presumption of innocence still governs (arts. 295 and 308). |
| "A court-appointed lawyer is no use." | Having technical defense in time is what matters; the Constitution guarantees a lawyer chosen by you or appointed by the court (art. 29 CN). What is decisive is not to be left without a defense. |
| "I can settle this by talking directly to the victim." | In querellable offenses there is a formal route —conciliation (art. 522)—; outside it, direct contact may make your situation worse. |
Checklist for the first 48 to 72 hours
If you have just been summoned, arrested or charged, or if you have learned that you are under investigation, these concrete steps bring order to the first hours while you find and coordinate your defense:
- Remain silent until you speak with a lawyer; do not give accounts or "clarifications".
- Write down the date, time and place of each step, and who took part in it.
- Ask for and keep a copy of the summons, the warrant or the record you are given.
- Exercise your right to notify someone of your arrest and to appoint defense counsel (art. 303).
- Do not hand over devices or passwords without legal advice.
- Gather and protect documents, messages, receipts and the details of possible witnesses.
- Do not contact the victim or the witnesses on your own.
- If there was an arrest, check that you are brought before the judge within the 36 hours.
- Prepare the audiencia de imputación and the hearing on the measure with your defense counsel, well in advance.
- Do not decide to accept the charges without a cold calculation of the evidence and of the likely sentence.
When to call: the simple rule
If we had to sum up this whole guide in a single sentence for the person under investigation, it would be this: call before you speak, not afterward. Before attending an interview, before giving an account, before accepting any charge, before the 36 hours run out. In criminal matters, the moment at which you act usually weighs as much as the facts.
At Cafore Abogados we accompany those facing a criminal investigation or criminal proceedings in Bogotá at each of these stages, with a calm and technical approach and without promises of results. If you have been summoned, arrested or charged, or if you have learned that you are under investigation, you can call 313 8411825 to organize your defense in time. And if you are still deciding whom to entrust your case to, in how to choose a criminal defense lawyer we explain what to look for.
Laws and case law cited
- Art. 28 of the Constitución Política — personal liberty; deprivation of liberty requires a written order from a competent judicial authority, and the person arrested must be placed at the judge's disposal within 36 hours. Source
- Art. 29 of the Constitución Política — due process, presumption of innocence and the right to a defense and to a lawyer during the investigation and the trial; nullity of evidence obtained in violation of due process. Source
- Art. 33 of the Constitución Política (Colombia's Constitution) — no one is required to testify against themselves, or against their spouse, permanent partner or close relatives. Source
- Arts. 7 and 8 of Ley 906 de 2004 — presumption of innocence and in dubio pro reo; right to a defense (not to incriminate yourself, silence that is not used against you, private communication with defense counsel, knowing the charges in comprehensible language). Source
- Arts. 73, 74 and 76 of Ley 906 de 2004 — lapse of the querella (6 months), offenses that require a querella and their exceptions, and withdrawal by the complainant. Source
- Art. 267 of Ley 906 de 2004 — powers of a person who has not been charged: to obtain advice from a lawyer and to gather evidence and interviews for their defense before the imputación. Source
- Art. 282 of Ley 906 de 2004 — questioning of an indiciado (a person under investigation who has not yet been formally charged): warning of the right to remain silent; questioning takes place, in the presence of a lawyer, only if the indiciado decides to make a statement. Source
- Arts. 286, 287, 288, 292 and 293 of Ley 906 de 2004 — formulación de imputación: concept, when it applies, content, interruption of the limitation period, and the rules on acceptance and its withdrawal. Source
- Arts. 295, 296, 297, 298, 301, 302 and 303 of Ley 906 de 2004 — the exceptional nature of restrictions on liberty, requirements and validity of the arrest, flagrancia, procedure and the 36-hour time limit, and the rights of the person arrested. Source
- Arts. 306, 307 and 308 of Ley 906 de 2004 — request, types, duration and requirements of the medida de aseguramiento; defense counsel as a condition of validity and pretrial detention as an exception. Source
- Art. 351 of Ley 906 de 2004 — sentence reduction of up to half for accepting the charges at the imputación. Source
- Art. 57 of Ley 1453 de 2011 — amended art. 301 of Ley 906 and set at a quarter the benefit for an allanamiento where the arrest was made in flagrancia. Source
- Arts. 321 to 323 of Ley 906 de 2004 — principio de oportunidad as a discretionary power of the Fiscalía, subject to the State's criminal policy. Source
- Arts. 348, 349 and 350 of Ley 906 de 2004 — purposes of preacuerdos, their unavailability without the return of 50% in offenses involving an increase in assets, and the forms of negotiation. Source
- Art. 522 of Ley 906 de 2004 — conciliation as a procedural prerequisite in querellable offenses. Source
- Arts. 239 and 246 of the Código Penal (Colombia's Criminal Code, Ley 599 de 2000) — the penalties for theft and fraud, used as a reference in the examples. Source
- Corte Constitucional, Sentencia C-591 de 2005 (M. P. Clara Inés Vargas Hernández) — the structure of the adversarial criminal system and judicial oversight of infringements of fundamental rights during the investigation. Source
Spanish
English
Portuguese
Chinese