In a statement that has generated great attention in the political and economic sphere, the lawyer and presidential candidate Abelardo de la Espriella denounced that President Gustavo Petro ordered the violation of the Constitution by ordering the departure of the Minister of Finance, Germán Ávila Plazas, from the presidency of the board of directors of the Bank of the Republic.
According to de la Espriella, this decision constitutes a “blow to the Constitution”, in reference to article 372, which expressly establishes that the function of chairing the board corresponds to the Minister of Finance and does not allow discretion on the part of the Executive.
You can now follow us on Facebook and in our WhatsApp Channel
In his message in
For the presidential candidate, Petro’s instruction represents a direct attack on the institutions and an unprecedented break in the coordination of the country’s economic policy.
He added that “the criminal government that violates the institutions must be confronted with character and ardor,” highlighting the seriousness that, in his opinion, the measure has within the framework of the legal and political order of Colombia.
The conflict occurred in the middle of the second meeting of the board of the Banco de la República in 2026, in which it was decided to increase the monetary policy rate by 100 basis points, taking it to 11.25%.
De la Espriella pointed out that Petro’s decision to remove the Minister of Finance after this increase not only challenges the Constitution, but also puts the country’s institutional and financial stability at risk.
According to him, “the people are not suicidal” and he warned about the possible consequences of allowing “a political current, in this case Uribismo” to continue dominating the board through what he considers maneuvers of the Executive.
In the same publication, de la Espriella recalled that the role of the Minister of Finance on the board is not optional, but rather a constitutional mandate that guarantees coordination between fiscal and monetary policy. “This is not a private company nor is there possible discretion,” he assured, insisting that Petro’s order constitutes a direct violation of the legal framework.
For him, this rupture represents a threat to the soul of Colombian identity and requires that citizens and political sectors act firmly to defend the founding principles of the country.
The lawyer and presidential candidate also contextualized the controversy with the recent decisions of the Bank of the Republic.
He explained that the increase in the rate responds to the need to control inflation and protect purchasing power, at a time when prices have shown rates of 5.4% in January and 5.3% in February, with expectations of closing the year at 6.3%.
De la Espriella argued that, in the face of these measures, the minister’s departure creates an institutional vacuum and a precedent without comparison in the recent history of Colombia.
In his analysis, he highlighted that the absence of the Government on the board could lead to economic decisions adopted without the constitutional representation of the Executive, which would open questions about the legitimacy of monetary policy.
In addition, He reiterated that this situation requires “strength in decisions and conviction in principles” to guarantee that institutions are not eroded by immediate political interests.
de la Espriella’s statement occurs in a context of high political tension. While the Government demands lower rates to stimulate growth and facilitate credit, the Bank of the Republic has adopted a contractionary approach, which has generated adverse reactions in the financial markets.
The lawyer and presidential candidate considered that this confrontation between the Executive and the central bank evidences an unprecedented fracture in the country’s economic policy and warns about the risks of an institutional breakdown.
