[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ theme_builder_area=”post_content” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” width=”100%” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″][et_pb_column _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” type=”4_4″ theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
Through an unprecedented decision, Colombia\u2019s Procuradur\u00eda General de la Naci\u00f3n sanctioned several officials of the Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio for irregularities during an administrative inspection carried out at the Registradur\u00eda Nacional, finding that information unrelated to the investigation was accessed, which could have resulted in the infringement of fundamental rights.<\/p>\n
The decision, issued at first instance, relates to the scope of administrative inspection powers and the limits on access to information during such proceedings. In this context, the discussion connects with constitutional jurisprudence on administrative inspections.<\/p>\n
The Constitutional Court has held that inspection visits have constitutional grounding and allow authorities to request documents and information necessary for the performance of their functions, even without prior judicial authorization. However, it clarified that these powers are not unlimited and must be exercised within the scope of the investigation, without conducting actions subject to judicial warrant requirements or accessing non-relevant information.<\/p>\n
The sanctions consisted of suspensions and disciplinary disqualifications imposed at first instance on the officials involved. This development has revived the debate on the scope of administrative inspections and the balance between supervisory powers of administrative authorities and the protection of guarantees such as privacy, due process, and confidentiality of information.<\/p>\n
Source<\/strong>: Decision 006-26 Procuradur\u00eda General de la Naci\u00f3n<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The balance between supervisory powers of administrative authorities and the protection of guarantees such as privacy.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":4427213,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[59,123],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4427210","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-newsletter-en","category-commercial-law"],"yoast_head":"\n