Tension in Cali: Councilman says Attorney General questions Resistance monument ahead of August 7 protests

Tensions are rising in Cali as the Attorney General's Office has questioned the construction permit for the "Monument to Resistance," a symbol of the 2021 social unrest. Councilman Andrés Escobar announced that the Public Ministry is seeking to annul the permit, citing alleged irregularities in its issuance and the structure's encroachment on mass transit property.

Escobar detailed the Attorney General's concerns, which focus on three main points: the permit was issued irregularly, with the monument being installed before the permit was granted; district planning failed to recognize that the site was designated for the MIO mass transit system; and Metrocali, the transit authority, was not consulted, leading to significant cost overruns for modifying the MIO's route. This situation heightens the tension just days before the inauguration of President-elect Abelardo De la Espriella.

“

The Attorney General based its opinion on three aspects: first, the permit was issued irregularly; they installed the Hand and then the permit came out. Second, district planning ignored that the space where it was installed was part of the designed, approved, and contracted route for the MIO station. And third, Metrocali was never consulted about the district planning decision, which generated millions in cost overruns for the modification of the MIO route.

However, some neutral observers note that the Attorney General's statement is a technical opinion within an appeals process, not a final ruling or an order for immediate demolition. The final decision rests with the Administrative Tribunal of Valle, which will determine whether to uphold a first-instance ruling or rule in favor of the plaintiff. The monument, erected in 2021 with the approval of the then-mayor's office, has been a focal point of controversy since the national strike that year.

The debate over the monument's legality is intensifying ahead of planned mobilizations on August 7. While defenders see it as a crucial symbol of social protest, opponents demand its removal. The councilman's statements have stirred strong reactions from both sides, underscoring the deep divisions surrounding the monument's place in the city.

“

Surely it will make the decision, and then the Tribunal will pronounce itself on the legality of the resolution as such.