What is the current legal landscape for White Collar Crime in your jurisdiction?

Legal Framework

Felonies under the Colombian Penal Code (Law 599 of 2000) are grouped in consideration of the underlying societal interests and values they aim to protect. They are investigated, prosecuted, and judged under a criminal procedure (Law 906 of 2004) characterized by an accusatory tendency. White Collar Crime is therefore not an autonomous title in the Penal Code, but rather a descriptive, non-formal nomenclature, which serves to identify non-violent economically motivated crimes in corporate or public (governmental) contexts. Typically, White Collar Crime would include forms of private and public corruption, corporate, accounting, market, tax, and cyber fraud, as well as money/asset laundering conducts.

Criminal policy and increasing severity of sanctions in White Collar Crimes

The evolution of Colombian criminal policy has brought on the creation of new felonies, an aggravation of punitive frameworks, and overall restrictions to benefits for criminal offenders of felonies having major impacts on society. This is also predicable of White Collar Crime.

Colombia has adopted a hardline stance in preventing and combating White Collar Crime. For example, transnational bribery (article. 433 of the Penal Code) is punishable by imprisonment for 9 to 15 years; mass and habitual collection of moneys (article 316 of the Penal Code) was increased to 10 to 20 years in prison, and asset laundering (article 323 of the Penal Code), is punishable by imprisonment for 10 to 30 years.

In turn, since the enactment of the so termed “Anticorruption Statute” (Law 1474 of 2011), additional felonies were added to the Penal Code. Among these, are private corruption (article 250A of the Penal Code), disloyal administration (article 250B of the Penal Code), restrictive agreements on competition (article 410A of the Penal Code), and influence peddling (article 411A of the Penal Code). Additionally, through the enactment of Law 1943 of 2018, the catalogue of tax-related crimes was increased by including omission of assets or inclusion of non-existent liabilities (article 434A of the Penal Code), as well as tax fraud or omission (article 434B of the Penal Code).

In parallel, under article 68A of the Penal Code and its successive amendments (enacted in years 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2024), certain criminal benefits, including the conditional suspension of punishment and home imprisonment have been excluded for conducts that fall under the category of White Collar Crime. As such, malicious/willful (dolo) crimes against Public Administration, transnational bribery, mass and habitual collection of moneys, fronting/nominee services, and asset laundering now exclude the possibility of granting benefits to offenders.

Institutional framework, authorities, and inter-institutional coordination

The Office of the National Prosecutor General (Fiscalía General de la Nación), with the assistance of the judicial police, directs the investigation and prosecution of alleged white collar criminals. The Penal Courts judge alleged indicted offenders. Additional executive branch entities serve in oversight and sanction-imposing roles. Among these, are the UIAF (Financial Intelligence Unit), the Superintendency of Corporations (oversight, investigation, and imposition of administrative sanctions in transnational bribery and compliance), the Superintendency of Finance (oversight of the financial system and securities exchange/market), the National Direction of Taxes and Customs (exercise of tax and customs authority), the Superintendency of Industry and Trade (the competition/antitrust authority). Furthermore, constitutionally autonomous so-termed “control entities” such as the Comptroller General of the Republic’s Office (Contraloría General de la República) and the Attorney General of the Nation’s Office (Procuraduría General de la Nación) exercise oversight and other powers over the use of public (governmental) resources and investigate and judge the disciplinary conduct of public servants, respectively.

Sharing and exchange of information between the above-mentioned authorities and international authorities is common practice. This leads to the possibility that the commission of a given White Collar Crime can have an expansive effect into other areas of accountability/liability such as administrative, fiscal (a form of government accountability not only applicable to public servants but also to state entity and quasi state entity contractors). This entails additional risks to those involved in White Collar Crime as it may require legal strategies that include all areas of accountability including eventual ramifications in other jurisdictions.

Legal entities in respect of penal law and sanctions

Legal entities are not subject to penal liability in Colombia. However, the Constitutional Court has ruled that there is no constitutional impediment if a law entailing such liability is enacted, so long as it satisfies the principle of legality (Rulings C-320/1998 y C-674/1998). Until a change in law occurs, the concept of action/conduct, which is a primary element of criminal liability, will continue to be, therefore, purely human. As such, crimes committed on occasion of business activities have natural persons as the sole criminally liable subjects.

Despite the above, legal entities (corporate or other) can suffer negative consequences stemming from the criminal conduct of a natural person associated with them. These consequences are not considered criminal punishments however and may vary depending on the particularities of each case, ranging from loss of property, disposition rights over goods or assets, the suspension or cancellation of legal personality, civil liability for the damages caused by the crime committed by the associated natural person, and others.

Additionally, and although not a legal risk, companies can also suffer reputational impacts deriving from crimes committed by their officers or employees. These types of impacts, which are not strictly legal risks, are often underestimated and can severely harm business.

Unlike in the context of criminal liability, in White Collar Crime events legal entities can be the subjects of administrative and other forms of liability. There is an ample catalogue of laws (Laws 1474 of 2011, 1778 of 2016, 2014 of 2019, and 2195 of 2022) which set forth such consequences. Examples range from debarment from state contracting, fines, public exposure, prohibitions to receive governmental subsidies or incentives, removal of authorized officers, among other individual or cumulative consequences. This usually occurs to companies allegedly acquiescing to the actions of their authorized officers or associated persons who have been condemned or benefited by deferred prosecution agreements for crimes against public administration and conducts against the public wealth/assets.

Corporate Compliance

Compliance is essential to determine if a company might suffer any of the above-described consequences or if it can reasonably aspire to be recognized as a victim in criminal cases, whether a given case involves its own officers or not.

Aside from proving damages suffered stemming from the commission of a given crime, companies must be able to prove that the criminal conduct at issue occurred even despite its implementation of risk management measures inherent to its operations, rather than due to the lack thereof.

It is very important to highlight that the effectiveness of SAGRILAFT (System for Self-Control and Management of Integral Risks of Money Laundering, Financing of Terrorism and Financing of the Proliferation of Mass-Destruction Weapons) / SARLAFT (Administration System of Asset Laundering and Financing Terrorism Risk), PTEE (Transparency and Business Ethics Program), and in general, corporate compliance programs is not measured by the mere existence of these, but by their design, structures, realistic implementation, and evidence of sufficient and coherent operation, commensurate to the true risk profiles of a given company.

Authorities expect to encounter true and updated matrices, clear role definitions (boards, leadership positions, truly independent compliance officers with resources, audit mechanisms), adequate due diligence in respect of clients and third parties, UBOs (ultimate beneficial owner), early monitoring and management of alert signals, and traceability in decision making, among others. They also observe whether there is alignment between corporate policies and operations: gifts, donations, contributions, sponsorships; whether there is risk specific training; controls which allow for verifiable systems, minutes, etc.

In practice, the difference between “compliance on paper” and effective compliance can be assessed in its true application and through the existence of registries thereof. Examples include comprehensive management of alert signals, independent audit processes, documented and informed decisions made by boards and management, and quantifiable remediation efforts. Nowadays, adequately documenting the real operation of compliance constitutes a strategic evidentiary asset in matters of White Collar Crime.

What three essential pieces of advice would you give to clients involved in White Collar Crime matters?

Upon a client’s knowledge of involvement in a white collar crime investigation or upon attaining reasonable inference of the commission of a white collar crime, we would initially advise clients to:

1. Seek to minimize risks leading to liberty restriction measures (what to do, what not to do);
2. Appoint a crisis management team (including communications) conformed by a reduced circle of trusted collaborators. Members should be designated on a need-to-know basis only, including internal and expert external resources); and
3. Perform a realistic and comprehensive assessment of risks in all areas and/or jurisdictions of foreseeable concern and/or liability (as discussed above, several other forms of liability might ensue from White Collar Crimes), including the use of tech-enabled tools to conduct and/or expedite internal investigations.

In the context of any matter, more so in White Collar Crime situations, knowledge is power. Clients must be advised permanently and properly in dealing with such situations and must learn what to do, when to do it, how to do it, and very importantly, what not to do. In practice, clients need to understand when they must communicate with or appear voluntarily before the authorities, and how to document such communications and/or appearances. Clients must learn and understand how to comply with official requests, they must define evidence preservation measures, apply or devise whistleblower, witness, evidence custody, and communications protocols, and adopt many other reactive and proactive measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate or manage ensuing risks.

As discussed in response to question 1., white collar crime events are seldom limited to criminal contexts. It is highly possible that administrative, civil and/or regulatory liability and/or reputational, and commercial risks ensue.

Once an expert crisis management team is conformed, which should include a high ranking level member experienced in internal investigations and interaction with authorities and third parties, that member must be tasked with: (i) preparing a risk assessment matrix including scenarios, probabilities and other aspects; (ii) aligning the criminal strategy with the administrative, sector, commercial and communications strategies; (iii) define a clear , coherent and evidence-based narrative (giving due regard to confidentiality when applicable); and (iv) inform management/board through clear and realistic executive reports for informed timely decision-making.

Additionally, it is advisable for clients to conduct an independent, tech-assisted, internal investigation aimed at adopting informed, strategic decisions. Investigation reports must illustrate hypotheses, chronology of events, interview outcomes and other pertinent aspects clearly. Technology assistance should benefit from pre-existing legal holds and put in place forensic preservation (including images, logs, hash values) on emails, chats, devices, and cloud storage; use eDiscovery/TAR for efficient, privilege-protected mass review; reconstruct timelines with metadata and consolidate an evidence repository with access controls. Analytics (such as payment patterns, third parties, and UBOs) allow for detecting inconsistencies and supporting defensive hypotheses or remediation plans. The result: early comprehensive case understanding, informed decisions (including calibrated cooperation), and a stronger, more cost-effective defense. As can be appreciated, this strengthens defense strategies, aligns boards and management, and enhances clients’ positions before competent authorities.

What are the greatest threats and opportunities in White Collar Crime law in the next 12 months?

Perhaps a threat perhaps not, but surely, a challenge in the coming months!

The start of political campaigns towards early 2026 will test the Colombian White Collar Crime apparatus as pertains to the effective application of its somewhat disperse legal and institutional frameworks. The upcoming congressional and presidential electoral races have already heightened scrutiny on public procurement, sponsorships, donations, and relationships with companies and businesses connected to political activity. At the same time, as discussed above, cooperation and information sharing between criminal, administrative, oversight, control, and sector authorities make it possible for the same event (criminally relevant white collar conduct) to be examined on multiple fronts. Our approach differentiates between the circumstantial risk inherent to the electoral calendar and the structural risk arising from inter-institutional exchanges; we manage the former through specific preventive controls and the latter through evidence management and a unified narrative.

Electoral cycle risk

This is an exogenous risk that intensifies temporarily. Reputational and regulatory sensitivity increases, information requests multiply, and findings regarding sponsorships, donations, hospitality, conflicts of interest, or public procurement escalate quickly. The focus is on traceability of contributions, due diligence on third parties, and compliance with internal rules regarding campaigns. The key is to be proactive: mapping sensitive contracts and relationships, establishing clear rules of interaction, and providing frequent executive reports for timely management decisions.

Risk from inter-institutional exchange

This is a permanent risk, endogenous to the system. Findings circulate among the Prosecutor’s Office, supervisory/oversight bodies, the Financial Information and Analysis Unit (UIAF), tax authorities, and competition authorities. Thus, a specific matter can lead to criminal, administrative, and sectoral proceedings almost simultaneously. This requires evidentiary and documentary consistency, a single chronology of events, and a controlled evidence repository, protected by privilege and with appropriate chains of custody. The electoral cycle triggers scrutiny. In turn, cooperation between authorities amplifies effects if the company lacks traceability of decisions, UBOs, and third parties.

Opportunities

This environment favors those who keep their house in order. A well-designed electoral “stress-test”, good practices regarding UBOs, and thorough identification of supporting documentation (KYC and conflicts checks, onboarding and offboarding of third parties), together with an inter-agency playbook to unify messages and evidence, help contain risk dispersion and improve negotiating positions. Early remediation — controls, reimbursements, targeted training — carries weight in defense and trials, assessment of negotiated outcomes, and corporate risk.

In the end, these challenges or threats represent a key opportunity for clients and law firms alike to do things well.

How do you ensure high client satisfaction levels are maintained by your practice?

Getting up-to-speed

As we familiarize ourselves with our clients’ particular situations or concerns, we ensure that we acquire a comprehensive understanding of the client’s business, operations, and specific circumstances that may have led to or contributed to the issue at hand. This enables us to offer strategic and dynamic advice. This involves a thorough analysis of the information, identifying risks, opportunities, and strengths. Based on this, we design a flexible action plan that is updated as facts and client decisions evolve, which is essential in complex corporate criminal matters.

Client satisfaction through holistic approach

Maintaining high client satisfaction levels is rooted in a proactive, holistic approach which considers each client’s unique circumstances. It requires strategic and dynamic legal advice. We prioritize clear communications, transparency, and realistic assessments, ensuring clients understand both the opportunities and risks inherent in their situations. Our commitment to cross-functional collaboration allows us to integrate input from specialized client teams, which is essential for navigating complex matters that may have reputational, financial, and cross-border implications. By mapping sensitive relationships, performing rigorous due diligence, and establishing robust evidence management protocols, we reduce risk exposure and provide strategic, actionable advice. Frequent executive reporting and early remediation measures further demonstrate our responsiveness and dedication to client outcomes.

Our practice also emphasizes on the importance of internal quality control, confidentiality, and a dynamic understanding of each client’s business and operations. This not only ensures legal consistency and evidentiary strength but also enables us to adapt strategies as cases evolve. Ultimately, our goal is to empower clients with the knowledge and support needed to make informed decisions, safeguard their interests, and successfully navigate the heightened scrutiny that characterizes today’s regulatory environment.

Transparency, clarity, and realism

We provide clear, thorough, and realistic explanations about the legal situation to align expectations from the outset. Our risk assessments are candid and balanced: they integrate the criminal dimension with regulatory, reputational, and business impacts, facilitating informed decisions by management and directors.

Internal quality control and confidentiality

We use peer reviews within the team and risk matrices adapted to each case to ensure legal consistency, evidentiary strength, and strategic coherence at every key milestone of the matters we handle. Moreover, confidentiality is a foundational principle at Lacouture & Bardinelli; it guides information management, workflow, and interactions with third parties, including the media and auditors.

Communications, availability, and client relations

We prioritize responsiveness and proximity, using the most effective communication channel depending on the context (instant messaging, email, phone calls, videoconferencing, or in-person meetings) and proactively coordinating schedules. Lacouture & Bardinelli combines expert knowledge with empathy, active listening, strategic communication, and crisis management—essential qualities for supporting clients in sensitive contexts.

What technological advancements are reshaping White Collar Crime Law and how can clients benefit from them?

In Colombia, with increasing momentum, the evidentiary center of gravity has shifted to digital. Emails, chats (WhatsApp/Teams), mobile devices, and cloud services now require rigorous digital forensic activities: images, logs, and hashes, all maintained with chain of custody and technical reports consistent with the procedural system, which tends toward the accusatory. The benefit is clear: early and defensible understanding of “who, what, when, and how,” reducing uncertainty and giving traction to tactical decisions that must be made in the course of a legal dispute across all proceedings of interest (criminal, administrative, fiscal, disciplinary, etc.).

Alongside expert consultants, law firms participate in mass review, which has evolved with eDiscovery and other tools (deduplication, email threading, relevance-based prioritization). This enables early case assessment in weeks and protects privilege through auditable workflows. Locally, deployment must be harmonized with data protection, labor policies, and, where there are cross-border transfers, with appropriate contracts and safeguards.

Analytics applied to compliance (SAGRILAFT/SARLAFT and PTEE) allow detection of anomalies in payments and third parties, mapping conflicts of interest, and cross-referencing UBO with RUB (Registry of Ultimate Beneficiaries) to explain control structures. The result is more refined prevention and measurable remediation (corrected controls, third-party cleansing, targeted training), which influences the posture of the Prosecutor’s Office, supervisory agencies, the UIAF, and other authorities.

In financial matters, expert consultants use blockchain analytics tools and transactional monitoring which make it easier to follow money trails when flows mix traditional banking and crypto assets, strengthening requests for precautionary measures and asset recovery strategies. And in technological incidents, the integration of SIEM/EDR with DFIR teams enables detection, containment, and preservation of usable evidence, mitigating risks of obstruction and evidentiary loss.

The premise remains unchanged: technology accelerates and strengthens but does not replace legal judgment. With legal hold and early preservation, data governance (custodians, sources, privilege), and a unified narrative, clients gain speed, evidentiary quality, and a better position to realistically decide between litigating, cooperating, or settling.