On October 14, tens of thousands of Colombians took to the streets to protest against the government of far-right leader Abelardo de la Espriella, who has been in office for just two months.
The protests demonstrated the opposition’s clear ability to mobilize its base and fill the streets of several Colombian cities, even though the new government is still in its early days.
Protesters – including members of labor unions, Indigenous organizations, opposition parties, and students – marched through the streets of the capital, Bogotá, as well as other major cities across the country, such as Cali, Medellín, Bucaramanga, Riohacha, and Pereira.
In an address to the nation, De la Espriella stated that 98% of the protests were peaceful, though he also warned the demonstrators: “From the very first day of my administration, I have issued a directive that leaves no room for interpretation: peaceful protest is respected, protected, and guaranteed. But violence, vandalism, and any attempt to violate the rights of others will have no place under my administration.”
He also added: “Here there is a state, here there is authority, and here there is a government that respects freedoms, enforces the law, and protects the millions of Colombians who get up early every day to work and build our nation.”
The main criticisms leveled against the government focused on the executive branch’s neoliberal agenda and its security policy. According to the protesters, De la Espriella is failing to address the difficult labor, educational, economic, and territorial conditions faced by Colombians; on the contrary, his political agenda is making these circumstances worse.
Specifically, the protesters complained about cuts and adjustments to the budgets of public institutions, the lack of greater public investment in education, and the fear among several indigenous organizations that the government’s new measures will prevent them from freely exercising their right to protest.
In fact, one of the main catalysts for the protests has been the signing of a presidential decree that empowers state agents to intervene more directly against protesters – a move that has been criticized, according to the protesters, for its anti-democratic intent.
On this point, social organizations, such as the Cauca Regional Indigenous Council assert that, fearing a popular backlash like the one Iván Duque faced (which turned into what some called a “rebellion” by young people that lasted several weeks in 2021), De la Espriella signed Decree 1525, which modifies law enforcement protocols to give state forces greater leeway when dealing with protesters.
Among other measures, law enforcement can now take direct action in response to protests without the need for exhaustive dialogue, as previously required by the regulation. Several human rights organizations have expressed concern about the decree, stating that it could increase the risk of abuses and reduce mediation as the primary course of action, which already was barely used. During the 2021 national strike in Colombia, 46 people were killed in the context of the heavy police repression of the strike.
One of the people attending the demonstrations last week was former President Gustavo Petro, who optimistically stated that the protests reflect a popular response to the executive branch’s decisions: “The people can organize themselves, and two months into the start of a tyrannical and imposed government, this is the best wake-up call. The time has come for a Latin American day of popular mobilization.”
Petro, who has just resumed leadership of the Pacto Histórico – a coalition of movements that supported his political project – also said: “This is how we respond to adversity with dignity, with the determination to win again, without fear. Life is our companion, not death. The people won’t give up, damn it.”
The National Museum of Colombia is rarely at the center of national debate, but this weekend it became the main focal point of controversy. On Thursday, alarm bells rang for many citizens when they saw that part of the nation had been erased from the galleries displaying objects, documents and photographs selected by curators to represent Colombia’s history and diversity.
© Fernando Vergara (AP Photo/Fernando Vergara)
A Bogotá court has ordered Colombia’s National Museum to preserve nearly 30 artworks removed from its exhibitions, prohibiting further alterations or removals without legal authorization amid growing protests over the government’s decision to take down pieces related to the armed conflict, feminism and LGBTQ+ communities.
RELATED: De La Espriella’s Cultural Counterrevolution In Colombia Kicks Off
The 24th Family Court of Bogotá issued the precautionary measures in response to a constitutional protection petition filed by Gabriel Becerra Yáñez, secretary-general of the Unión Patriótica party, and members of the León Zuleta and Revolución en Rosa collectives.
Judge César Enrique Osorio Ortiz ordered the museum to keep the affected works in appropriate conservation conditions and prohibited the institution from moving, destroying, altering, deaccessioning or returning them to third parties. The museum must also preserve all records, exhibition plans, minutes and communications related to the removals.
The court gave the museum’s management 24 hours to submit a detailed report identifying the works’ current locations and conservation conditions, including items removed from exhibition rooms and the Miguel Ángel Díaz memorial garden. The report must also identify the authority responsible for ordering their removal.
🇨🇴 Seis museos de arte moderno de Colombia cuestionaron el retiro de al menos 30 piezas históricas del Museo Nacional en Bogotá. #teleSUR #Colombia #Cultura pic.twitter.com/dsicaHCuPI
— teleSUR TV (@teleSURtv) October 18, 2026
Text Reads: Six modern art museums in Colombia questioned the removal of at least 30 historical pieces from the National Museum in Bogotá.
The dispute began last week after President Abelardo de la Espriella ordered nearly 30 works removed from the museum’s permanent exhibitions. His office characterized the pieces as an “ode to terrorism.” The works address historical memory of Colombia’s armed conflict, feminist demands, LGBTQ+ rights and the 2016 peace agreement with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).
In its ruling, the court emphasized that artistic expressions connected to historical memory, truth-seeking and symbolic reparation for victims are protected under Colombia’s Constitution.
The decision cited the Constitutional Court’s recognition that such works serve a broader public purpose.
“Artistic expressions associated with processes of historical memory, extrajudicial truth and symbolic reparation for victims are not merely cultural manifestations, but constitutionally protected instruments for building collective memory, dignifying victims and ensuring guarantees of non-repetition,” the ruling stated.
The judge added that these expressions warrant enhanced protection because of their close links to the fundamental rights to truth, historical memory, artistic freedom of expression and symbolic reparation for victims.
The court found reasonable grounds to suspect that these rights had been violated and warned that further harm could occur without immediate conservation measures. It said the precautions were necessary, urgent and proportionate to prevent irreparable damage while the case is considered on its merits.
Text Reads: Historical memory cannot be erased!
The justice system accepted our legal petition and ordered the protection of the works removed from the National Museum, the halting of any further unjustified removals, and the preservation of the garden dedicated to Miguel Ángel Díaz.
The memory of the victims and the rights that have been won must be defended!
The petition names both the Ministry of Cultures, the Arts and Knowledge and the National Museum. Each has one business day to respond, submit evidence and clarify whether administrative decisions authorized the removals, as well as the degree of institutional autonomy between the two bodies.
The proceedings also involve President de la Espriella, Bogotá’s Secretariat for Women, the Sexual Diversity Directorate of the District Planning Secretariat, the Secretariat for Social Integration, the Sí Mujer Foundation and the Colombian Communist Party. These parties were also given one business day to submit evidence.
The legal challenge comes as opposition to the removals has spread beyond the courtroom. On Monday, university professors moved their classes to the steps of the National Museum, holding open-air lectures to discuss the government’s decision and what they described as censorship.
Academics from several disciplines used an amplification system to address the public. The sessions took place under the watch of numerous officers from the National Anti-Riot Unit (Unadi), the same force deployed during large demonstrations outside the museum over the weekend.
Text Reads: ABELARDO DE LA ESPRIELLA SEEKS TO ERASE HISTORICAL MEMORY
The president has ordered the removal of images and references to Carlos Pizarro Leongómez—former M-19 commander and a key figure in the peace process—from government-controlled public spaces. This decision follows the provisional suspension of the designation of his hat as a piece of cultural heritage, and comes amid a visit to the Ministry of Culture, during which he also lashed out against inclusive language.
Arguing that “terrorists” should not occupy public spaces, the government is attempting to dictate which parts of history deserve to be remembered.
Memory cannot be erased by decree. History cannot be rewritten from a position of power.
Catalina Muñoz Rojas, an associate professor in the Department of History and Geography at the University of the Andes and an organizer of the classes, said the removed works were part of exhibitions developed over years to reflect the pluralism and diversity enshrined in Colombia’s 1991 Constitution.
She argued that the president’s intervention disrupted democratic, participatory curatorial processes involving communities from across the country. The professors plan to continue their educational activities throughout the week, engaging members of the public and the officers stationed outside the museum. Organizers urged the officers to respect the peaceful, academic nature of the protest.
Ana López, a resident of Colombia who attended the demonstrations, described the government’s decision as arbitrary and authoritarian, warning of the risk of more sweeping censorship aimed at silencing the country’s cultural and social diversity.
The removals have also prompted public criticism from Colombia’s modern art museums and the Colombian committee of the International Council of Museums (ICOM Colombia), alongside protests outside the institution.
The court’s precautionary measures will remain in force while it considers the petition’s merits. The proceedings will address the legal basis for the removals and allegations that the decision violated rights related to historical memory, artistic expression and symbolic reparation.
El Museo Nacional de Colombia rara vez es centro del debate nacional, pero este fin de semana se convirtió en el principal epicentro de la polémica. El jueves, la alerta sonó para muchos ciudadanos cuando vieron borrada una parte de la nación de los pasillos que muestran objetos, documentos y fotos elegidos por los curadores para representar la historia y la pluralidad de Colombia. El Ministerio de Cultura aterrizó el discurso del presidente Abelardo de la Espriella sobre los valores conservadores del país y ordenó retirar 30 piezas de la exposición permanente Hacer Sociedad: eran objetos del movimiento LGBTIQ+, de liderazgos feministas, de los estudiantes que impulsaron la Constitución de 1991, de dos líderes de la izquierda que fueron asesinados en 1990. “Es un museo mutilado”, resume Andrés Góngora, profesor y antropólogo en museos.
© Fernando Vergara (AP Photo/Fernando Vergara)
The United States is increasing its military presence in Latin American countries. The U.S. military has sent hundreds of soldiers to conduct training in Panama, an activity they will repeat later in Honduras and Colombia, The New York Times reported. The military detachment is preparing to take part in special operations against drug trafficking cartels, sources for that outlet said.
© CONTACTO vía Europa Press (CONTACTO vía Europa Press)
It is 2022. In a neighborhood in western Caracas, Yolanda (a fictitious name) walks through a checkpoint manned by hooded police officers. In her pocket, she carries a small transparent bag containing several misoprostol pills – the second part of the treatment recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for a safe medical abortion.
© Andrea Hernández Briceño
© Andrea Hernández Briceño (EL PAÍS)
© Andrea Hernández Briceño (EL PAÍS)
© Andrea Hernández Briceño
© Andrea Hernández Briceño (EL PAÍS)
© Andrea Hernandez Briceno
© Andrea Hernández Briceño
The United Nations warned Thursday that Colombia’s new rules governing protests could give police excessive discretion to use force, potentially putting peaceful demonstrators at risk.
RELATED: Colombia’s First National Strike Against De la Espriella Met With Police Crackdown
Signed Tuesday by President Abelardo de la Espriella, the decree changes police procedures during demonstrations, allowing authorities to act against people committing violent acts without waiting for dialogue with protesters to conclude.
In a statement released Thursday, the UN Human Rights Office in Colombia raised concerns about the criteria for ending negotiations, the decree’s definition of violence and the circumstances under which authorities can intervene in road blockades.
Some provisions are open to broad interpretation, the office warned, potentially allowing authorities to end dialogue and resort to force.
The decree identifies several grounds for intervention, including carrying or using weapons, holding people against their will, assaulting others and destroying infrastructure. The UN acknowledged that these acts pose different risks to life and physical integrity but said they must be addressed separately.
Action against people committing violent acts should not automatically end dialogue with demonstrators who continue to protest peacefully, the office said.
It also stressed that force, including less-lethal weapons, must be used only as a last resort, after nonviolent means of restraint have been exhausted, in accordance with General Comment No. 37 on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Colombian President Abelardo de la Espriella signed Decree 1525, a measure that facilitates police repression by broadening the definition of “violence” during popular protests.
— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 14, 2026
Interior Minister Rodrigo Lara warned that the new regulation will take effect before demonstrations… pic.twitter.com/YYfouyRGyt
The office also criticized the decree’s definition of violence as broader than international standards, noting that it includes threats of aggression and conduct that does not necessarily cause injuries, deaths or serious property damage.
Authorities should distinguish between carrying an object that could be considered a weapon, threatening to use it and actually using it, the UN said. Possession alone does not make someone violent or change the peaceful nature of an assembly.
The UN warned that blocking a road does not, by itself, make a demonstration violent. It also called for a review of the decree’s reference to a “serious and imminent disruption,” saying the criterion could be used to justify breaking up peaceful protests.
The duration of a blockade, the importance of the road affected and the resulting economic losses should not, on their own, justify coercive action, the office said.
“Economic impact or disruption to the normal functioning of a productive activity should not, in themselves, constitute justification for the use of force,” it said.
The office acknowledged that some provisions could help protect the right to peaceful protest, particularly those distinguishing peaceful demonstrators from people committing violent acts. However, it insisted that protecting peaceful assemblies must remain the primary objective of any changes to protest regulations.
The UN office said it had consulted the Colombian government on the decree and that some of its proposed amendments were incorporated into the version signed Tuesday.
Colombia’s left took to the streets on Wednesday against President Abelardo de la Espriella and fared better than expected. Despite doubts about its ability to mobilize people, fears of police repression stoked by the president himself, the threat of rain and the fact that the protest fell on a weekday, thousands of Colombians demonstrated peacefully for hours. The marches, seen in the country’s main cities, were the first test of the ability of a battered left to mobilize the grassroots after losing power to a right-wing outsider allied openly with the United States and who embodies everything that progressives abhor.
Thousands of people took to the streets across Colombia on Wednesday in the first national strike against President Abelardo de la Espriella’s administration, as police used tear gas, rubber bullets and armored vehicles to disperse demonstrators in several cities.
RELATED: Colombia Holds First National Strike Against De la Espriella
Protests spread across more than a dozen departmental capitals and municipalities, including Bogotá, Medellín, Cali, Barranquilla, Ibagué, Popayán and Bucaramanga. In Bogotá, four columns of demonstrators converged on Bolívar Square under a security operation monitored by a Unified Command Post.
In Medellín, demonstrations escalated into clashes between protesters and the Mobile Anti-Riot Squadron (ESMAD). Security forces deployed tear gas, rubber bullets and armored vehicles, leading to several arrests. Assaults on members of the press were also reported.
Clashes and serious public disturbances were also recorded in Ibagué and Popayán following police interventions. Human rights organizations, including the NGO Temblores, denounced the presence of armed men carrying rifles on the rooftops of government buildings in Bogotá, describing their deployment as a direct threat to protesters.
The demonstrations brought together trade unions, teachers, university students, Indigenous communities, LGBTQ+ groups and feminist organizations. Opposition figures, including former President Gustavo Petro and Senator Iván Cepeda, also took part.
Protesters called for labor, education and social protections, seeking to preserve measures introduced under the previous administration, including free access to public universities and increases in the minimum wage. They opposed what they described as a neoliberal shift under De la Espriella’s government, citing budget cuts and the administration’s initial economic reforms.
Colombianos:
— Abelardo De La Espriella (@ABDELAESPRIELLA) October 15, 2026
Me dirijo a ustedes esta noche para entregarles un balance claro, objetivo y contundente de la jornada de manifestaciones que vivió hoy nuestro país.
¡Que quede absolutamente claro! El 98% de las movilizaciones transcurrió de manera pacífica.
La inmensa mayoría de… pic.twitter.com/CmllZVPBtu
Text Reads: Colombians: I address you tonight to deliver a clear, objective, and unequivocal report on the day of demonstrations that our country experienced today. Let it be absolutely clear! 98% of the mobilizations took place peacefully. The vast majority of those who took to the streets exercised their legitimate right to protest in an orderly and respectful manner toward the institutions. That is democracy, and as President of the Republic, I will always defend and guarantee it. At the close of this day, the national tally records a total of 62,000 citizens mobilized. A figure that represents a very small proportion of the Colombian population, but whose rights and guarantees deserve the full respect of the State. From the first day of my Government, I have issued a directive that admits no interpretations: peaceful protest is respected, protected, and guaranteed. But violence, vandalism, and any attempt to violate the rights of others will have no place under my mandate. Because as legitimate as the right to demonstrate is the right of millions of Colombians to work, move freely, and live in tranquility. Here there is a State, here there is authority, and here there is a Government that respects freedoms, enforces the law, and protects the millions of Colombians who rise early every day to work and build the Nation. Firm for the Nation! Long live Christ the King! (A.D.L.E.)
Demonstrators also rejected the restoration of diplomatic relations with Israel and what they described as U.S. interference in Colombia’s affairs.
Tensions mounted after the government signed a decree hours before the marches that changes the rules governing police conduct during public demonstrations. De la Espriella defended the measure as necessary to combat “urban terrorism,” while opposition politicians and social organizations condemned it as an attempt to intimidate protesters.
Senator Cepeda warned that the decree risked returning Colombia to a situation in which fear enabled arbitrary actions by security forces.
“They want to take us back to a time when fear becomes the means through which the security forces act arbitrarily,” Cepeda said.
Trade union sources said organizers were already drawing up a schedule of further mobilizations for the coming months following Wednesday’s mass protests. The campaign could culminate in a general strike in November.
The strike unfolded barely two months into the president’s term. Protesters filled the streets of Bogotá, Cali, Medellín, Bucaramanga, Pereira and Riohacha in a direct rejection of the government’s economic and security agenda.
The call brought together labor unions, student groups, opposition parties, labor federations and the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC).
RELATED: Colombian President Signs Decree Expanding Police Powers to Disperse Protests
Organizers described the turnout as a condemnation of the government’s economic and security agenda, the rising cost of living, a rise in violence, the rollback of social gains and what they call attempts to criminalize the right to protest.
Demonstrators emphasized the peaceful nature of the protest, pushing back against signals from the presidential palace that seek to delegitimize the demands of civil society.
The trigger was Decree 1525, signed by De la Espriella. The measure sets rules for the conduct of security forces at public gatherings and allows authorities to disperse them in the event of serious disturbances. Local governments responded with a large deployment of police in the main cities.
The opposition read that operation as an attempt to condition the right to demonstrate in advance. The reading sharpened a day that organizers had already framed as an expression of accumulated anger over the cost of living and the dismantling of social programs.
“Protest is the only instrument left to native people and social organizations to be heard and to demand that our rights be respected,” demonstrators said.
Así luce la Plaza de Bolívar en este momento. Por más que la derecha y los medios intenten decir que no se llenó, aquí sigue la ciudadanía después de la lluvia.
— U L D A R I C O (@UldaricoRamire) October 14, 2026
¡Un pueblo lleno de dignidad! pic.twitter.com/GiaMgORgyB
Discontent is not limited to the decree. The mobilized sectors question the entire set of the government’s early decisions, accusing it of dismantling social gains and making daily life more expensive for the majority.
The Colombian Federation of Education Workers (Fecode), the Colombian Federation of Educators, rallied in defense of public education and the health coverage of teachers. The union also demanded the reconstruction of school infrastructure damaged by earlier emergencies, including the earthquake and its aftershocks in the Cauca Valley, and denounced what it calls the stigmatization of teachers’ unionism.
Native and peasant communities rejected the megaprojects and economic measures they say endanger their ancestral territories. The Cauca Indigenous Regional Council (CRIC) warned that the De la Espriella administration is working to break the autonomy of their organizations.
The economic agenda concentrated much of the anger. Rising prices and policies that organizers say erode acquired rights pushed workers from various productive sectors onto the streets. The protests now carry the weight of a first major social test for the national government, only two months into its mandate. Workers’ federations and popular movements frame the conflict as the defense of historic gains against an agenda they consider regressive.
For the new government, the demonstrations mark a direct challenge. The police deployment in six cities, the breadth of the coalition and the presence of a former President all signal that the strike has moved beyond a dispute over one decree.
Whether the mobilization alters the course of the government’s program remains to be seen. Organizers have promised the pressure will continue if De la Espriella does not reverse the decree and reopen dialogue with the social sectors.
Em um cenário de alta tensão política e social, milhares de pessoas marcharam em Bogotá, Cali, Medellín, Bucaramanga, Pereira e Riohacha para expressar rejeição à agenda econômica e de segurança do presidente, ao aumento do custo de vida, à escalada da violência, ao retrocesso de conquistas sociais e às tentativas de criminalizar e coibir o direito ao protesto.
Na mobilização em Bogotá, espera-se a presença do ex-presidente Gustavo Petro, acompanhado por lideranças progressistas.
Os manifestantes enfatizaram o caráter pacífico do protesto, em resposta a alegações difundidas pela Casa de Nariño que buscam deslegitimar as reivindicações da sociedade civil colombiana.
O estopim foi o Decreto 1525, assinado por De la Espriella. A norma estabelece regras para a atuação das forças de segurança em manifestações e autoriza as autoridades a dispersá-las diante de distúrbios graves. Os governos locais responderam com ampla presença de agentes uniformizados nas principais cidades.
A oposição interpretou essa operação como uma tentativa de reprimir, de antemão, o direito de manifestação.
Essa leitura acirrou ainda mais os ânimos em um dia que os organizadores haviam anunciado como uma expressão do descontentamento devido ao custo de vida e ao desmonte de programas sociais. O descontentamento não se limita ao decreto. Os setores mobilizados questionam o conjunto das primeiras decisões do presidente, ao qual acusam de desmontar conquistas sociais e de encarecer a vida da maioria da população.
A Fecode, Federação Colombiana de Educadores, saiu em defesa da educação pública e da saúde do professores. A entidade reivindicou, ainda, a reconstrução da infraestrutura escolar afetada por emergências anteriores — como o terremoto e as réplicas registradas no Vale do Cauca — e denunciou a estigmatização sofrida pelo sindicalismo docente.
As comunidades indígenas e camponesas, por sua vez, rejeitaram os megaprojetos e as medidas econômicas que colocam em risco seus territórios ancestrais. O CRIC alertou que a administração de De la Espriella busca minar a autonomia de suas organizações.
A pauta econômica concentrou boa parte do descontentamento. O encarecimento do custo de vida e as políticas que, segundo os organizadores, corroem direitos adquiridos levaram trabalhadores de diversos setores produtivos às ruas.
Os protestos na Colômbia assumem, assim, a dimensão de um primeiro grande embate social contra o Executivo, apenas dois meses após o início de sua gestão. As centrais sindicais e os movimentos populares situam o conflito na defesa de conquistas históricas, em oposição a uma agenda que consideram regressiva.
* É proibida a reprodução deste conteúdo
Segundo o governo, o objetivo é reforçar os mecanismos de controle e garantir a ordem pública durante as manifestações populares.
Entre as disposições anunciadas está o acompanhamento permanente das manifestações pelas autoridades. O decreto estabelece que os agentes encarregados da supervisão devem manter uma distância mínima de quatro metros, como parte dos protocolos de controle previstos para esses eventos.
Além disso, o decreto autoriza a intervenção das forças de segurança quando for detectado o porte ou o uso de armas de fogo, armas brancas, explosivos ou artefatos incendiários. Também prevê intervenções em casos de retenção de pessoas contra sua vontade ou agressões contra terceiros.
O documento inclui proteção específica para servidores públicos, pessoal uniformizado, missões médicas e equipes jornalísticas, estabelecendo competências de atuação diante de qualquer ataque ou ameaça dirigida contra esses setores durante as mobilizações.
O Executivo apresentou ainda outras iniciativas legislativas de seu programa de governo, entre elas, um projeto de lei para o combate a grupos armados organizados e um estatuto antiterrorista.
*É proibida a reprodução deste material
Login