The Right of Reply Belongs to Colombia’s Opposition Parties, Not to Gustavo Petro Himself
COLOMBIA · GOVERNMENT
Key Facts
- —The country Colombia, which changed government in August after four years of its first left-wing president.
- —What happened The new president went on national television on Sunday and accused his predecessor of theft.
- —The rule A 2018 law gives opposition parties equal airtime to answer any presidential broadcast.
- —The window Forty-eight hours, same length, same time slot, usable three times a year.
- —The problem Gustavo Petro said he would request it. The law gives the right to parties, not people.
- —The catch His own party can use it, and said so. The clock runs out on Tuesday night.
Forty-eight hours, equal airtime, same slot, three times a year. The clock started on Sunday night.
Colombia has an unusual rule, written in 2018 after decades of presidents using television as a weapon. It is a right of reply with teeth.
When the president addresses the nation, the opposition gets to answer him on air. The law says how, and how fast.
Not a statement to reporters. Real airtime, the same length, in the same slot, within forty-eight hours.
What Set the Clock Running
At eight o’clock on Sunday evening, President Abelardo De la Espriella went on national television. He took office on 7 August and this was his first set-piece address.
He accused the previous government of what he called a massive theft of the public treasury. He said the country had been left on the edge of a precipice.
His predecessor is Gustavo Petro, Colombia’s first left-wing president, who governed from 2022 until August. Petro answered on Monday through his account on X.
He would request a reply, he wrote, to an address designed to deceive the nation and hide its author’s own incapacity. He rejected the corruption accusation outright.
He also said the man making it had built his wealth on drug trafficking. That is a grave allegation made without evidence in a social media post, and it is reported here as his words.
The Rule Gives the Airtime to Parties
Colombia’s opposition statute is Law 1909 of 2018. Article 15 covers presidential broadcasts specifically.
When the president uses the public airwaves, parties declared in opposition get space on the same outlets within forty-eight hours. It must match in length and slot.
A separate article, 17, creates the true right of reply, triggered by serious distortions or public attacks by senior officials. Colombian coverage tends to call both of them by the same name.
Both articles use the same phrase for who holds the right. It belongs to political organisations declared in opposition.
Not to individuals. Not to former presidents, however recently they held the office.
So Petro personally has nothing to request. What he can do is ask his party to spend one of its three annual turns.
His Successor Got the Wording Right
Iván Cepeda‘s statement on Monday is the one that matters legally. As the former president has requested, he said, the Pacto Histórico will use its response to last night’s address.
That is the correct construction. The party acts, and the individual asks it to.
The Pacto Histórico has standing because it filed a declaration of opposition within the statutory month after the government took office. It did so alongside two smaller parties, among twenty that registered a position.
Two things remain unknown. Nobody has confirmed that a formal request has been filed with the authorities.
Nor is it public how many of the three annual turns the party has already used in 2026. If they are gone, the argument is academic.
The Number Petro Reached For
He defended his record with a figure, and the figure is worth unpacking. His government, he said, paid nearly 100 trillion pesos, about US$32.6bn at Monday’s official rate.
That is three separate things, not one. He named borrowing from the International Monetary Fund, a fuel subsidy, and pandemic-era transfers to health insurers.
The fuel subsidy is the best documented of the three. His government settled 57.3 trillion pesos, about US$18.7bn, owed to the state oil company across 2023 and 2024.
The fund borrowing dates to December 2020, under President Iván Duque, so his point about who took the loan stands. The central bank confirms it was repaid on schedule, with the last payment in December 2025.
The health insurer component is not quantified in any public source. No document adds the three together.
One more caveat belongs on the dollar figure. Those pesos were paid between 2023 and 2025, when the currency traded far weaker than it does now.
At the rates in force at the time, the same sum is closer to US$22bn or US$25bn. Today’s strong peso flatters the claim by roughly a third.
More: Colombia news in English, every day from The Rio Times.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a former Colombian president demand a right of reply?
No. Articles 15 and 17 of Law 1909 of 2018 give the airtime to political organisations declared in opposition, not to individuals. Petro can ask his party to use it, which is what Iván Cepeda announced.
How long is the window?
Forty-eight hours from the presidential broadcast, with equal airtime in the same slot on the same channels. A party may use it three times a year.
What did the president say?
That the previous government carried out a massive theft of the public treasury and left the country on the edge of a precipice. He took office on 7 August 2026.
Is Petro’s 100 trillion peso figure correct?
It is plausible as a sum of three items, about US$32.6bn at today’s rate, but no document totals it. The fuel subsidy component, 57.3 trillion pesos or about US$18.7bn, is documented.
Why does the exchange rate matter?
Those payments were made when the peso was far weaker. At the rates in force then, the same sum is closer to US$22bn or US$25bn rather than US$32.6bn.
Sources: Law 1909 of 2018 as published by the Colombian Senate, Semana, Infobae, El Espectador and El Tiempo.
This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated newsroom system. How we use AI · Report an error · Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Editor-in-Chief
In depth