Corruption in Colombia has a broad meaning. Corrupt practices include:

• The acceptance by a public official of any benefit in exchange for said public official to misuse his/her official position. This refers not only to actions against what is established as a public official’s duties but also to perform his/her duties in a more efficient manner (facilitation payments);
• The offering of a bribe, whether it is accepted or not, is also considered a crime; and
• Even if the promised benefit is never actually received, the mere agreement between parties regarding a bribe, constitutes a crime.

The Colombian regulatory framework addresses bribery from different perspectives (criminal, administrative, civil, etc.). Although anti-bribery and anti-corruption are scattered in different regulations, the key legislation includes the following:

• Law 599 of 2000 (Colombian Criminal Code): Includes criminal responsibility for bribery-related conducts in articles 405, 406, 407 and 433. In Colombian, criminal liability is applicable only to individuals.
• Law 1474 of 2011 (Anti-Corruption Statute): Increased the penalties and broadened the scope of crimes related to domestic and transnational corruption by individuals. It includes administrative and criminal provisions regarding responsibility for bribery and the prevention of such conduct.
• Law 734 of 2002 (Unified Disciplinary Code) and Law 836 of 2003 (Disciplinary Code Applicable to individuals part of the Colombian Armed Forces): Addresses multiple conducts that may result in disciplinary offenses or prohibitions, as well as duties that are applicable to public officials and private agents involved in public service.
• Law 1778 of 2016 (Transnational Bribery Act): Established a regime of direct administrative liability for legal entities involved in transnational bribery. It vested authority in the Colombian Government, through the Superintendence of Companies, to impose sanctions and fines on Colombian legal entities, foreign parent companies of Colombian subsidiaries, and foreign subsidiaries of Colombian companies, that engage in transnational bribery and domestic corruption.
• Resolution 200-000558 from the Superintendence of Companies: Provides limits in the application of article 23 of Law 1778 of 2016, which created the obligation for certain legal entities to implement a Business Code of Ethics and adopt policies aimed at preventing transnational bribery.
• External Circular 100-000003 of 2016 from the Superintendence of Companies: Guide issued by the Superintendence of Companies, regarding the minimum requirements of the Business Codes of Ethics to be implemented by certain legal entities and the prevention of transnational bribery as directed by article 23 of Law 1778 of 2016.
• Law 2014 of 2019: Harshens the penalties applicable to those who have committed crimes against the public administration. In addition, it establishes that legal entities that have been found responsible for corruption will be debarred from contracting with the Colombian state and that all ongoing contracts will be unilaterally terminated and the condemned legal entity will have to pay the liquidated damages established in said contracts.
   

Over the past 10 years, three specific laws have been enacted regarding corruption and corruption prevention. Law 1474 of 2011, (Anti-Corruption Statute), Law 1778 of 2016, (Transnational Bribery Act), which modified article 433 of the Criminal Code, to include a specific definition of transnational bribery and Law 2014 of 2019 which harshened the penalties applicable to those condemned for crimes against the public administration.

Law 1474 of 2011 was created to increase penalties for corruption. One of the main changes implemented by Law 1474 was the possibility of sanctioning not only individuals involved in corrupt practices but also the corporate entities that benefited from their crimes. Through this regulation, Congress recognized that corruption tends to become a part of corporate structures, once it’s seen as an acceptable way of conducting business.

On the other hand, through Law 1778 of 2016, transnational bribery was included in the Colombian Criminal Code. Law 1778 also establishes the obligation for certain corporate entities to implement a Business Code of Ethics and mechanisms to prevent local and foreign corruption. The main objective of this regulation was to promote ethical practices within corporate structures through effective mechanisms, which allow companies to prevent, detect, and report corrupt practices.

Law 2014 of 2019 specifically established that individuals condemned for crimes against the public administration are not eligible for house arrest and that all awarded time will have to be served in an ordinary penitentiary. In addition, individuals condemned for crimes against the public administration will be debarred from contracting with the Colombian State. Said debarment will be spread to legal entities in which the condemned individual was a manager, legal representative, board member or shareholder. If an individual has an ongoing contract with a public entity and is condemned for crimes against the public administration, the entity may apply penalty clauses included in the contract. 
 

Yes. Payments to domestic government officials are prohibited by local legislation. The Colombian Criminal Code, through articles 405, 406 and 407, punishes both public officials who accept a benefit to misuse their official position as well as those who offer or give said benefit.

Yes. Bribe payments to foreign government officials are illegal under Law 1778 of 2016. This law modified article 433 of the Colombian Criminal Code, making it a crime to offer any benefit to a foreign public official. Transnational bribery may also result in administrative liability for Colombian legal entities, foreign parent companies of Colombian subsidiaries and foreign subsidiaries of Colombian companies.

Yes. the Colombian Criminal Code, through articles 405 and 406 prohibits public officials from accepting or requesting any kind of benefit to misuse their official position. This includes receiving facilitating payments. In addition, under Law 734 of 2002, these conducts may lead to the public official to be subjected to disciplinary actions or fiscal liability.

Although only individuals may be subject to the penalties described in the Colombian Criminal Code, legal entities may be subject to corporate responsibility pursuant to Laws 1474 of 2011, 1778 of 2016 and 2014 of 2019. Colombian legal entities, foreign parent companies of Colombian subsidiaries and foreign subsidiaries of Colombian companies are subject to Law 1778 and Law 2014. The sanctions which may be imposed on legal entities include fines, the cancellation of the legal entity’s license, debarment from state contracting and publication on the legal entity’s web page, of the imposed sanctions.

There is no criminal liability for corporate entities. Only administrative sanctions may be imposed on legal entities involved in corrupt practices, as more fully described below under "Assuming corporate entities are liable for violating the legislation, what is the penalty for corporate entities for violating the law?"

Penalties for individuals who violate articles 405, 406, 407 and 433 of the Colombian Criminal Code include:

• Imprisonment for up to 15 years.
• Fines of up to 50,000 Colombian Legal Minimum Wages (approximately, USD $12,900,000 for 2020); and
• Debarment from public office for up to 15 years.

Law 1474, article 34 establishes that any corporate entity that tries to benefit from crimes against the public administration can be subject to (i) suspension or cancelation of its mercantile registry; and (ii) temporary closure of the entity’s establishments.

It also sets forth responsibility for a legal entity (a company established in Colombia or a Colombian branch of a foreign company) when its legal representative or manager has been convicted of acts of bribery that benefited the company. This may result in fines of up to 200,000 Colombian Legal Minimum Wages (approximately USD $56,635,470 for 2020), publication of the sanction, a general prohibition of accessing governmental subsidies or incentives for a five year period and debarment from contracting with public entities for up to 20 years.

As per Law 1778 of 2016, articles 2 and 5, the Superintendence of Companies may investigate and penalize any corporate entity whose employees, contractors, managers or associates are involved in foreign corrupt practices. Sanctions include:

• Fines up to 200,000 Colombian Legal Minimum Wages (approximately USD $56,635,470 for 2020).
• Debarment from government contracts for up to 20 years.
• Mandatory publication of the imposed sanctions in the entity’s webpage and high circulation newspapers; and
• Debarment from receiving government incentives or benefits for up to five years.

Yes. Implementing a compliance program designed to prevent corrupt practices can help a legal entity when being investigated for these conducts. Pursuant to Law 1778 of 2016, if a legal entity can demonstrate that it had an effective compliance program and the corresponding controls in place, it may be exempted from liability for the actions of its employees and managers.

Under Law 1778, article 19, a legal entity may reduce or even be exempted altogether from penalties if they self-report a violation to the Superintendence of Companies. The latter will depend on the timeliness, quality, and usefulness of the information provided.

To be eligible for a full exemption, the entity must come forward and provide information before either (a) the Superintendence of Companies initiates its own investigation; or (b) the contract obtained through a corrupt practice is executed/benefitted from. If these conditions are not met, penalties may still be reduced by up to 50 percent.

As established in the previous answer, a corporate entity may also benefit from implementing effective policies and controls regarding the prevention of corrupt practices, and the way in which corrupt practices must be reported. Depending on how effective the policies and controls prove to be and how diligent the legal entity has been in enforcing its compliance program, it may be excluded from responsibility altogether.