Germán Miranda lasted 26 days. President Abelardo de la Espriella asked for his removal on X, and Interior Minister Rodrigo Lara confirmed it minutes later on Saturday 3 October 2026. The president said he had learned of facts “of the utmost gravity.” He didn't say what they were.
That vagueness is the first problem. Lara pointed to signs of an alleged attempt to keep evidence from reaching the Fiscalía, the Attorney General's Office that brings criminal cases, but officials haven't said what evidence the minister meant. Reports available by Saturday afternoon named no interim head.
What the Government Said
De la Espriella wrote that “the mere suspicion of irregular conduct” would be enough to demand an official's exit. In his government, he added, “there will be no leniency” toward conduct that compromises transparency, La República reported. According to Infobae, Lara said Miranda had been “declared insubsistente on the spot.” The declaration cancels a discretionary appointment, and it doesn't require a disciplinary ruling first.
No formal finding stands behind the dismissal. Whether the Fiscalía will open an inquiry into Miranda's removal on these grounds remained unclear.
The Allegations and What's Unproven
El Tiempo, Semana and La FM published excerpts of recordings in which Miranda allegedly discussed a prosecution involving Bernardo Morales, the Envigado fire commander near Medellín. Infobae, citing El Tiempo, reported that Miranda allegedly sought money in exchange for steps before prosecutors. La FM noted that the excerpts alone don't prove obstruction. The excerpts published Saturday hadn't been authenticated.
Infobae, La Opinión and Diario La Libertad also reported a separate audit case at the Contraloría, the Comptroller General's Office. Officials initially put the alleged loss at COP 115 million, or about US$35,000 at 3,312 pesos per dollar, the 2 October close. Diario La Libertad said the case concerns a contract between the directorate and a network of higher education institutions. Semana reported that Miranda rejected the case as persecution in August. It has produced no finding. In the coverage reviewed, he hadn't responded publicly.
Questions about his fitness for the job predate the recordings. La Opinión and Infobae reported that the directorate's administrative staff had questioned whether Miranda met degree and experience requirements, an opinion made public when he was appointed. El País and La República reported that he had more than 20 years in the national fire system. He had also previously led the directorate under President Juan Manuel Santos, whose term is given as 2010–2018.
A Directorate Under Strain
Lara swore Miranda in on 7 September as crews fought forest fires in several departments. El País of Cali reported 21 active fires that day across Tolima, Cauca, Vichada, Norte de Santander, Valle del Cauca and Nariño. Large burns had hit Tolima in August and the hills above Villa de Leyva in Boyacá in September.
Municipal and volunteer brigades handle day-to-day firefighting. The directorate coordinates them and channels national support. When its leadership turns over this fast, local crews depend on an office in flux.
This isn't the first abrupt exit at the top. Asuntos Legales reported that then-president Gustavo Petro declared director Lourdes Peña del Valle insubsistente over contracting concerns on 8 April 2025.
Why This Matters: A public agency that coordinates volunteer and municipal fire crews has now lost its director for the second time in about a year and a half, and in the latest case the public still doesn't know what the evidence is. A president's call for zero tolerance on transparency carries more weight when officials specify the allegations, test them and handle them through the Fiscalía and the Contraloría. Discretionary appointments can be cancelled without a disciplinary ruling. That's fast, but it leaves little record for citizens to judge. Meanwhile, the people who depend on the system—from rural communities near burning hillsides to the volunteers who face the flames—need steady coordination and national support. From a public-accountability standpoint, open questions remain: whether the recordings are authentic, whether prosecutors will act, and who will lead the directorate next.