On Saturday 3 October 2026, Colombia's former attorney general Francisco Barbosa said the state had spied on him. He said he faced wiretaps, physical surveillance and searches in state databases while he headed the prosecution service under former president Gustavo Petro. Barbosa plans to file a criminal complaint on Monday 5 October. He calls the alleged operations one of the gravest attacks on judicial independence in Colombia's recent history.
Barbosa ran the prosecution service from February 2020 to February 2024, a four-year term. He alleges that the National Intelligence Directorate (DNI) and the Financial Information and Analysis Unit (UIAF) took part. The UIAF tracks suspicious money flows for the Finance Ministry. According to La Opinión, Barbosa says the surveillance aimed to intimidate prosecutors investigating people close to Petro. His former deputy, Martha Mancera, was also allegedly watched.
What Barbosa Is Asking For
Barbosa wants the Fiscalía, the office he once ran, to investigate whoever ordered, carried out or covered up the operations. He wants the inquiry to move quickly, "so that time does not erase the criminal traces," Infobae quoted him as saying. He has also asked the DNI and UIAF to hand over and preserve documents, work orders and records concerning him.
Those requests matter. Intelligence work leaves a paper trail. Whether that trail survives will shape what investigators can establish. The Fiscalía must now decide whether and how to investigate. The DNI and UIAF must respond to his records requests. No one has been charged.
The Audit Behind the Allegations
Barbosa's claims follow a forensic audit of the DNI ordered by President Abelardo de la Espriella, a right-wing lawyer who took office in August. Semana published the findings on Saturday. Auditors collected 147 terabytes of data, 40 computers and five phones or tablets, the magazine reported. They classified more than 100 DNI staff members as a critical or high security risk.
Semana wrote that the agency became "a kind of political police" under Petro. It also questioned a drone bought for COP 9 billion, about US$2.7 million, that crashed in the Catatumbo region. Weekly intelligence reports reached Petro, the magazine reported. A UIAF source told Semana that anyone who "smells of uribismo," the movement of former president Álvaro Uribe, was watched.
Semana's list of alleged targets includes former presidents Álvaro Uribe and Iván Duque, former Inspector General Margarita Cabello and former Comptroller Carlos Felipe Córdoba. It also names politicians María Fernanda Cabal and Paloma Valencia, and retired generals Eduardo Zapateiro and Luis Fernando Navarro. La FM reported a similar list on Saturday.
The record has gaps. Reports published on Saturday included no response from Petro or from the five men who ran the DNI under him. The DNI had earlier rejected accusations from de la Espriella and asked for evidence, Semana noted. Petro's political opponent commissioned the audit. Its findings remain allegations; no court has ruled on them, and everyone named is presumed innocent.
An Old Wound
Colombia has faced this before. The DNI was created in 2011 to replace the DAS, which the government dissolved after it spied on Supreme Court judges, journalists and opposition figures. That scandal, known locally as the "chuzadas" or wiretaps, hit the government of Álvaro Uribe. The DNI is now 15 years old. The claims against it echo the reasons its predecessor was shut down.
Why This Matters: If the allegations hold up in court, they would describe a state intelligence apparatus turned against officials who are supposed to check political power. Prosecutors, judges and watchdog officials can only do their jobs if they don't fear that the government is watching them. Colombia dissolved one spy agency over that kind of abuse, and the DNI was meant to be its accountable replacement. The same standard applies whichever party holds office. An audit commissioned by a president's opponent isn't a court ruling, and the presumption of innocence covers everyone named. That puts the burden on the Fiscalía and the courts, not political score-settling. Whether the DNI and UIAF preserve and hand over their records, and whether an independent investigation follows, will show if Colombia's oversight of its intelligence services works.