Colombian TV Host Jorge Alfredo Vargas Pleads Not Guilty to Sexual Harassment Charges
On the second day of the charge hearing against journalist and television presenter Jorge Alfredo Vargas, held this Tuesday, August 4, the communicator did not accept the charge brought against him by Colombia’s Office of the Attorney General.
The proceeding, as requested the previous day by the attorney for one of the four alleged victims, was held behind closed doors. In that way, the prosecuting authority informed Vargas of the facts for which he is being investigated in four cases of alleged sexual harassment at the facilities of Caracol Channel.
That media outlet informed both Vargas and fellow journalist Ricardo Orrego last March about the existence of complaints filed against them. Five days later, it announced the departure of both communicators.
The 41st Judge for Control of Guarantees of Bogota, who is handling the case against Vargas, warned of the duty to preserve the confidentiality of the proceeding and to refrain from making public references or disclosures related to personal or sensitive information concerning the alleged victims, or any information that could allow their direct or indirect identification.
The purpose of this measure, according to the judge, is to guarantee the protection of the alleged victims’ privacy, dignity, and safety, in accordance with the provisions of Law 906 of 2004. On that point, she ordered the suspension of the hearing’s livestream.
However, it became known that, during Tuesday’s hearing, Vargas decided not to accept the charges brought by the Office of the Attorney General. The prosecuting authority now has three months to complete its case and request the pretrial hearing.
Confidentiality of the alleged victims’ information
The judge had warned that, although the complainants would be referred to as “victim 1, 2, and 3,” the continued withholding of identifying information could affect the “communication” aspect, which is the main objective of the charge hearing.
“Victims of sexual harassment in workplace environments have the right, among others, to privacy, confidentiality, protection against revictimization, and protection from possible retaliation,” the prosecutor delegated by the Office of the Attorney General had stated during the hearing, and she also requested both that the hearing remain confidential and that the identities of the complainants be anonymized.
“Although the delegated prosecutor stated that during the course of this proceeding a document containing the names of the alleged victims will be provided to the parties to the case, this court considers that such action is not sufficient to fully and effectively guarantee the defense’s access to the relevant information in the proceedings that the defense requires,” the judicial official said.
In ruling on the requests submitted by the fifth prosecutor delegated before the Supreme Court and the victims’ representative, the judge stated that the law is clear regarding the protection mechanisms available to complainants.
In another part of her remarks, the judicial official emphasized that the presumption of innocence remains fully intact, reminding those present that, in this hearing, the accused is only being informed of the facts that are the subject of the investigation.