Colombia Leader Staggers Under Drug Allegations

BOGOTA, Colombia —  A Colombian version of Watergate has President Ernesto Samper staggering under allegations that powerful drug lords contributed millions of dollars to his campaign last year.

The widening scandal--dubbed “drogagate” by the media in a play on the Spanish word for drugs--could cost Samper his job, analysts say. “I’m inclined to think that he will fall,” said Rodrigo Losada, a political scientist at Bogota’s Javeriana University.

So far, the manager and the treasurer of Samper’s 1994 presidential campaign have been arrested on suspicion of receiving illegal political contributions from traffickers. The former campaign manager, detained Tuesday, was one of Samper’s closest associates and his minister of defense until early this month, when he resigned under a cloud of suspicion.

Fighting for his political life, the president denies that he knew of any drug money in his campaign and points proudly to his administration’s remarkable record in cracking down on narcotics kingpins. Since early June, Colombian police have dismantled the top leadership of the so-called Cali cartel, which has dominated world cocaine traffic since 1993.

Samper has called the accusations against him “forms of blackmail that seek to prevent us from continuing the fight we are waging against narco-traffic.”

That fight, however, is not enough to dispel the dark shadow over the 45-year-old Samper. His former campaign treasurer has turned against him, telling prosecutors that the 1994 campaign requested and received at least $6 million from the Cali bosses with Samper’s approval.

At Samper’s own request, the congressional Accusations Commission is evaluating evidence against him, provided by the country’s chief prosecutor. If the commission and the Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of Congress, decide that a trial of the president by the Senate is justified, and the Senate agrees, Samper will be suspended from office pending the outcome.

That would be the equivalent of impeachment.

It has been common knowledge in Colombia for years that drug money greases political gears, but this is the first time that evidence of cocaine corruption has threatened to topple a president. Regardless of Samper’s fate, “drogagate” is giving Colombians a volatile new example of how those who export dangerous drugs can also be a danger at home.

Three Names in News

As “drogagate” has heated up in the past two weeks, headlines have focused on three names in addition to the president’s:

Alfonso Valdivieso. A bulldog investigator who has been the nation’s chief prosecutor for the past year, Valdivieso is concentrating his efforts on drug corruption. He has vowed to follow evidence wherever it may lead, and it has led to Samper’s campaign finances.

Santiago Medina. As campaign treasurer, Medina kept detailed records of contributions. Prosecutor Valdivieso had Medina detained July 26. Two days later, Medina began to talk.

Fernando Botero Jr. The person most seriously compromised by Medina’s declarations to prosecutors was Botero, Samper’s defense minister--until he resigned Aug. 2--and son of Colombia’s most famous artist, Fernando Botero Sr. Medina said the younger Botero, as Samper’s campaign manager last year, coordinated the collection of $6.1 million from the Cali drug bosses.

After learning that a warrant had been issued for his arrest Tuesday, Botero turned himself in to the prosecutor’s office, where he was detained. He can be held for investigation without formal charges for up to 18 working days.

The week after Medina signed a detailed statement, Botero read and denied parts of it in a press conference. That raised the question of how the government obtained a document that was part of the prosecutor’s secret files. The prosecutor revealed that burglars had broken into his offices, leading to speculation about possible official involvement in a burglary reminiscent of Watergate.

Medina’s statement also was leaked, Watergate-style, to the newspaper El Tiempo. In some of his most incriminating allegations, Medina said:

* At the end of April, 1994, Botero told Medina to go to Cali and ask the drug cartel for $2.4 million. Medina mentioned the plan to Samper. “He told me, very nervous, that he wanted to be left out of that and that I should coordinate with Fernando Botero whatever we deemed suitable.”

* At Botero’s request, Medina took a five-point message from Samper to the cartel. The message included thanks for the cartel’s support and a promise to negotiate with the cartel’s leaders for their surrender under special conditions, including reduced prison sentences, as provided by law.

* When he returned to Bogota, Medina delivered a letter to Samper from the cartel’s two top leaders, brothers Gilberto and Miguel Rodriguez Orejuela. “They expressed to him their unconditional support due to the friendship that united them for many years.” The Rodriguez Orejuela brothers also asked for a meeting with Samper, but he refused, “saying that it would become known sooner or later.”

* Medina calculated that the cartel gave Samper’s campaign the equivalent of $1.2 million for the first round of presidential elections and $4.9 million for a runoff vote in June, 1994. While making his statement, Medina gave the prosecutor’s office several folders of documents as proof.

In denying Medina’s allegations, government officials have pointed to obvious falsehoods and inconsistencies in his statement. A top government official told foreign correspondents last week that officials have learned that Medina was secretly working for the Cali cartel.

Officials also emphasize that in last year’s campaign organization, Samper was responsible only for political and policy matters and had no involvement in the financial side.

A New Bombshell

Last week, as the country weighed the leaked documents, accusations and denials, a new bombshell exploded. The weekly newsmagazine Semana published the transcript of a tape recording made during last year’s campaign. Samper is talking by telephone to Elizabeth Sarria, who along with her husband, Jesus, is a suspected drug trafficker.

Elizabeth Sarria offers Samper a diamond ring as a gift for his wife. “Ah, how divine,” Samper says.

He invites Sarria to come and see him, according to the transcript. But she wants him to go see two unnamed people, apparently potential campaign contributors. He says he doesn’t have time and that she should bring them to him.

Samper’s office has said that Samper did not accept the diamond ring, that Sarria was not a known trafficker at the time and that no meeting with contributors was arranged.

Later in the week, reports surfaced of Sarria’s 1986 arrest in La Canada Flintridge, on charges of possessing narcotics for sale.

During a preliminary hearing, a sheriff’s detective testified that narcotics officers believed Jesus and Elizabeth Sarria and their local attorney were smuggling large quantities of cocaine and laundering up to $18 million a year. But they arrested Elizabeth Sarria on far more limited charges: possession of 28.5 grams of cocaine and 57 grams of another substance containing cocaine.

The case was dismissed in April, 1987, after several delays. The case file contained no reason for the dismissal.

Samper supporters have hinted that the allegations against him are part of a plot by drug traffickers, political forces or even U.S. agents.

“We are going to show that there are some hidden forces behind this thing,” said lawyer Antonio Cancino, who represents Samper before the congressional commission.

A European diplomat predicted that the survival of Samper’s presidency will hinge on whether evidence proves that he knew about drug money in his campaign.

“We’re looking at a Nixon type of situation here,” the diplomat said, recalling the Watergate scandal.

If it comes to impeachment, Juan Carlos Pastrana predicted that Samper will resign. Pastrana, the editor of the daily La Prensa, is the brother of Andres Pastrana, the Social Conservative Party candidate who lost to Samper last year.

“Nixon could not subject himself to the indignity of a trial,” Pastrana said. “I believe that Samper cannot subject himself to the indignity of a trial.”

Some analysts say that for political reasons, the Accusations Commission is unlikely to recommend that Samper be formally charged by the lower house. Nine of the panel’s 15 members belong to Samper’s Liberal Party, and some of them are under investigation themselves on suspicion of receiving drug money.

But if evidence against Samper from the prosecutor’s office is strong, both the commission and the lower house will be under public pressure to bring charges.

Times staff writer Stephanie Simon in Los Angeles contributed to this report.