A Scandal That Demands Answers, Not Deflection
On July 25, 2026, Revista Semana published one of the most explosive investigations of this political cycle. Over thousands of words, dozens of WhatsApp chats, audio recordings, bank transfer receipts, and testimonies from three witnesses who participated in the scheme, Semana laid out in excruciating detail how Juliana Guerrero — widely considered the most powerful woman in the Petro administration — and her sister Verónica built a parallel structure to extort businessmen with promises of government contracts.
The evidence is staggering. A meeting with the Guerrero sisters cost one million pesos. Contracts at the Ministries of Housing and Interior were allegedly traded for 200 million pesos upfront plus 10% of each awarded project’s value. The sisters controlled three state entities. They moved through the Ministry of Equality, the Ministry of Environment, the DAPRE, the Ministry of Defense’s Military Hospital, and the FONSECON fund as if they owned them — all without holding public office.
Yet the most scandalous part of this story is not what the Guerrero sisters did. It is how the head of state, the governing coalition, and the army of government influencers have responded.
The President’s Response: A Masterclass in Deflection
President Gustavo Petro finally broke his silence on X (formerly Twitter). His response deserves to be read in full:
“The evidence indicated here reflects that the so-called ‘businessmen’ became furious and perhaps handed over the chats, because they weren’t given what they were promised. If it’s true, they handed over money like fools, thinking that the ministers, or I myself, were acting under pressure from women or out of greed.”
— @petrogustavo, July 2026
This is not the response of a head of state confronting a corruption scandal within his own administration. This is the response of a man who has decided that the most convenient narrative is that everyone is corrupt — the businessmen, the accusers, the magazine — and therefore no one is responsible.
Petro refers to the businessmen as “fools” who were “swindled.” He calls the investigation “a good demonstration of barriers working against corruption.” He says “the corrupt businessmen seem to have been swindled, and the government prevented them from stealing.” The subtext is unmistakable: the Guerrero sisters did nothing wrong; the real criminals are the businessmen who tried to bribe them and then got upset when the deals fell through.
Notice what Petro does not say:
- He does not explain how Juliana Guerrero — who presented a false accountant’s title to the Casa de Nariño to be appointed Vice Minister of Youth — ever gained such proximity to power.
- He does not explain why, despite multiple warnings from officials like Angie Rodríguez (former director of DAPRE) and from opposition congresswomen like Jennifer Pedraza, no action was taken for over a year.
- He does not explain why he defended the Guerrero sisters publicly when questions were first raised about them.
- He does not call for an immediate and transparent investigation into how these two women, without any formal government position, were able to enter ministries and dictate hiring and contracting decisions.
Instead, he vilifies the whistleblowers and frames a corruption network as a victory for his government’s anti-corruption “barriers.”
The Historical Pact’s Vacuum of Moral Leadership
Where is the Historical Pact coalition in this moment? Where are the movement’s intellectual voices, its congressional leaders, its grassroots organizers?
Before July 26, 2026, the figures who have positioned themselves as the government’s most visible defenders — Lalis, Levi Rincón, and the constellation of “progresista” influencers — have offered only superficial statements. They condemn corruption in the abstract while carefully avoiding any mention of the Guerrero sisters by name. They call for “investigations” without acknowledging that the President himself appears to have known about or at least tolerated their presence at the highest levels of power.
This is a coalition that came to power promising a “new politics” — a complete break from the clientelism, corruption, and institutional capture that defined Colombia’s traditional parties. The Historical Pact was supposed to be different. Its leaders campaigned on moral integrity, on the idea that government would no longer be a tool for personal enrichment, on the promise that the days of influence trafficking and contract-skimming were over.
Yet when the most concrete evidence of corruption within their own government emerges — evidence that checks every box of the old politics they claim to have defeated — they respond with silence. It is a silence that speaks louder than any denial.
If the Historical Pact cannot demand a radical, transparent clarification from its own leader; if it cannot publicly ask: How did Juliana and Verónica Guerrero get their positions? Where did they come from? Who protected them? Who inside the government facilitated their access to ministries? — then it has surrendered its moral authority permanently.
The Role of Civil Society: We Must Demand More
Colombian civil society — the journalists, the watchdog organizations, the ordinary citizens who have supported the proyecto de cambio — must not accept this response.
We have seen this pattern before. When corruption allegations surface against a government that claims to represent change, the instinct is to close ranks, to question the messenger, to point out that the accuser (in this case, Semana) has a political bias. And indeed, Semana has an evident political agenda — as congressman Carlos Carrillo noted, the magazine’s bias is no secret. But that does not make the evidence disappear.
The WhatsApp messages exist. The bank transfers exist. The audio recordings exist. The testimonies of three people who were inside the scheme exist. The fact that a powerful media outlet with an anti-government bias published this investigation does not change the content of what they published.
Civil society must demand three things, clearly and without equivocation:
- A full, public, and transparent explanation from President Petro: How did Juliana and Verónica Guerrero rise to become the most powerful unelected figures in his government? Who hired them? Who promoted them? Who enabled their access to the Casa de Nariño, to ministries, to the DAPRE?
- A clear break from the “both sides are corrupt” narrative. Petro’s response — framing the businessmen as fools who were rightfully swindled — is not an acceptable accountability mechanism. The businessmen may well face prosecution for bribery. But that is separate from the question of how the Guerrero sisters operated within the state, and whether anyone in the government knowingly facilitated it.
- Judgment by society, not just by institutions. The Prosecutor’s Office must investigate, yes. But this is also a political and moral question that cannot be delegated to the judicial branch. The Historical Pact must decide if it stands for transparency or for impunity when its own people are involved.
From Defense to Deflection: A Damning Trajectory
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this entire affair is the trajectory of the President’s position.
For months, as questions about the Guerrero sisters circulated — as Angie Rodríguez gave her interview to Semana, as Jennifer Pedraza raised the issue in Congress, as the investigation slowly built its evidentiary base — President Petro defended them. He dismissed the allegations as attacks by the establishment. He framed any criticism of his inner circle as an attack on his government’s project.
Now, with the evidence undeniable, he has not admitted error. He has not apologized. He has not explained why he defended them. He has simply changed the story: now it is about how the real corrupt people were the businessmen all along, and how the government’s “barriers” worked perfectly to stop them.
This is not the response of a leader who has learned from his mistakes. It is the response of a politician who is trying to survive a scandal by muddying the waters. The Colombian people deserve better.
What Must Happen Now
The President must go beyond the dismissive tweet. He must sit before the country and answer:
- How did Juliana Guerrero, a woman with a fake accountant’s title, become the second most powerful person in the Casa de Nariño?
- Who inside the government protected the Guerrero sisters and enabled their access to ministries, budgets, and decision-making?
- Why did he defend them for months when journalists and congresswomen were already sounding the alarm?
If President Petro cannot answer these questions — if the Historical Pact continues to treat this as a media conspiracy rather than a systemic corruption problem within their own ranks — then they will have proven that the “new politics” was never real. It was simply a rebranding of the same old patterns of power, patronage, and impunity that Colombians have suffered under for generations.
🌐 Read this article in:
🇺🇸 English · 🇪🇸 Español
Sources
- Semana, “SEMANA revela las pruebas de la red de corrupción de Juliana Guerrero y su hermana Verónica: chats, audios y consignaciones bancarias” (July 25, 2026). https://www.semana.com/nacion/articulo/…
- President Gustavo Petro’s official statement on X (@petrogustavo, July 2026), as cited in the Semana article.