Carlos Andrés Ríos, the director of Colombia's Administrative Department of the Presidency (DAPRE), has accused President Gustavo Petro of exploiting 48 women for parties at the Casa de Nariño. The allegations suggest that official service contracts were used to facilitate these gatherings, a claim Petro has dismissed as a political attack.
The DAPRE allegation of 48 service contracts
During a recent congressional hearing, Carlos Andrés Ríos alleged that President Gustavo Petro oversaw a system that weaponized administrative resources for personal use . according to the report, Ríos claims that 48 women were hired through specific service contracts with the primary purpose of being present for the President during social events. the director of DAPRE asserted that the Casa de Nariño, the presidential residence, was being utilized for daily partying rather than the business of governing the nation.
These accusations suggest a systematic misuse of state-funded contracts to maintain a social circle within the executive branch. While the specific names of the women or the exact dates of these alleged gatherings have not been released, the scale of the claim—involving nearly 50 individuals—presents a significant challenge to the administration's fiscal transparency.
Petro’s defense of state-funded aid for vulnerable women
President Gustavo Petro has strongly denied the allegations, characterizing them as a coordinated effort by political opponents to damage his reputation. Petro argued that his administration’s work with vulnerable populations, including female heads of households and sex workers, is a legitimate component of his social policy. He maintains that providing these women with different life options through funded programs is fundamentally distinct from the allegation of exchanging contracts for sexual favors.
In a statement addressing the controversy, Petro noted that his administration provides concrete, funded programs intended to support those in precarious economic positions. He further stated that no individual participating in these public programs would testify that he had engaged in the behavior described by Ríos. As reported by the source, Petro also acknowledged visiting sex work establishments in his youth but stated he abandoned those practices decades ago.
Tensions with Donald Trump and drug trafficking claims
The scandal arrives as President Petro faces increasing pressure from international figures, most notably U.S. President Donald Trump. The tension between the two leaders has escalated following various public disputes and accusations regarding drug trafficking. Trump has previously suggested that Petro should remain cautious following U.S . operations in Venezuela, specifically citing the flow of cocaine from Bogotá.
This broader political friction provides the backdrop for the current allegations. Petro has linked the accusations made by Ríos to a wider campaign of character assassination involving figures such as Abelardo de la Espriella . The President contends that these attacks are designed to portray him as corrupt or linked to drug traffickers, despite what he describes as a lack of evidence regarding such claims .
The unverified details of the Casa de Nariño parties
Despite the gravity of the claims made by the DAPRE director, several critical pieces of information remain unconfirmed. It is currently unknown whether the 48 women mentioned in the congressional hearing have been identified or if any of them have provided testimony to support the allegations of contract exploitation. Furthermore, the source does not clarify if an independent audit of the DAPRE service contracts is currently underway to verify the nature of these hires.
The investigation remains centered on whether the administrative framework of the presidency was indeed "tailored" for social gatherings, as Ríos claimed. Until the specific service contracts are scrutinized by judicial or legislative bodies, the distinction between legitimate social aid and the alleged misuse of funds remains a matter of intense political dispute.
Comments 0