The declassification of the Epstein Files by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Jan. 30 shook the very foundations of global power. Around the world, prominent figures mentioned in them—ranging from CEOs of major corporations and politicians to even members of royalty—have had to resign their positions and titles due to their connections with the deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his partner and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, who was sentenced to 20 years for recruiting minors for sexual exploitation. Although appearing in the files does not necessarily imply wrongdoing or criminal activity, many have been called to testify or answer for their relationships with the pair.
However, that has not been the case in Colombia, according to a group of 171 women journalists, writers, lawyers and other professionals who, as of March 12, had signed the so-called “Manifiesto No al pacto de silencio” (Manifesto: No to the pact of silence).
Former Colombian President Andrés Pastrana Arango, who led the country from 1998 to 2002, is one of the most prominent Latin American leaders mentioned in the files. The signatories of the manifesto call his limited comments distancing himself from the documents “unacceptable.” They also call the “pact of silence” maintained by state agencies, the majority of the ruling class and a significant portion of the country’s media, unacceptable.
“While in other countries we saw oversight bodies investigating, opening inquiries and the media scrutinizing the names of the people appearing in those documents and demanding explanations, it seemed to us that the questions raised about Pastrana were mild or nonexistent. It was as if they were waiting for time to pass and the scandal to be overshadowed by other news,” Ana María Mesa Villegas, a radio journalist and founder of the digital news outlet Barequeo, told LatAm Journalism Review (LJR). Mesa is one of the signatories and was designated as the group's spokesperson for an interview with LJR.
In rare public comments regarding Epstein and Maxwell, Pastrana said he had no knowledge of or connection to the crimes currently making headlines.
According to figures shared in the manifesto, in Colombia, more than 50 minors are sexually abused on a daily basis, and in the last five years, more than 100,000 girls and adolescents have been victims of sexual violence. Colombia has also become a “regional hotspot for sexual exploitation and human trafficking,” it says.
Because of these figures, the document continues, Pastrana's explanations are more than necessary, especially because his relationship with Epstein and Maxwell took place while he was president, and continued until 2009 when Epstein had already pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from a minor under 18 years of age.
“As women journalists or columnists, we felt that there was a lot of calm surrounding situations that are very serious because they are related to the trafficking of women, girls and boys, and that it was pertinent to make those silences evident,” Mesa said.
Although it was not the first time Pastrana's name had been linked to Epstein and Maxwell, the recent publication of documents provided more details about how the relationship allegedly went beyond occasional encounters.
The DOJ revelations, detailed in the manifesto and by media outlets such as BBC Mundo, indicate that the three met on at least three occasions, including a first meeting in Ireland. Pastrana's name appears on the flight logs of two of Epstein's private planes, and on at least one occasion, both Epstein and Maxwell were in Colombia and met the leader.
The visit to Colombia in 2002, when Pastrana was still president, is one of the events that has raised the most questions due to the well-known photographs showing Maxwell dressed in a Colombian Air Force (FAC) uniform. In one of the photos, taken at the Tolemaida military base, Maxwell is seen embracing Pastrana, who is also wearing an FAC uniform, and another shows her with a retired FAC colonel. According to DOJ documents and some emails, Maxwell said that in Colombia she had piloted a Black Hawk and had even fired on guerrillas from the air.
These same documents detail another encounter in 2003 in which Pastrana boarded Epstein's plane twice. Also on board was Jean-Luc Brunel, a French modeling agent who committed suicide in 2020 while under investigation for alleged rape of minors and sex trafficking. That same encounter ended in Cuba because Pastrana facilitated a meeting between Epstein and Fidel Castro.
The DOJ also published email exchanges detailing possible meetings of the three in cities such as New York and Madrid.
Former President Pastrana has rarely spoken about the matter. His comments have primarily been made through social media or public statements. On those occasions, he has said that he knew Epstein and Maxwell before learning of the accusations against Epstein and that he never traveled to Epstein's island. Their relationship, he said, was based on Epstein's qualifications as a banker and the possibility of investments in Colombia. On Feb. 24, he wrote on his X account: “I never had any knowledge of or connection to the horrific crimes that are now a just cause for global scandal.”
Regarding Maxwell's helicopter flight, Pastrana said that it was a seven-minute flight, but that she never piloted it—nor did she fire at guerrillas.
However, he has given very few interviews. One of the most recent was with BBC Mundo, where he answered some questions via WhatsApp.
Pastrana told that media outlet that the relationship with Epstein stemmed from his possible investment in Colombia, but did not answer "why specifically the fact that Maxwell flew a Black Hawk was part of the interests of the Colombian State at that time," BBC Mundo reported.
According to the media outlet, Pastrana summarized his version of events as follows: “I didn’t fly on the ‘Lolita’ [Epstein’s private plane], but once on a Gulfstream [another of his planes] without minors. And I never went to the island, nor was I a witness or participant in any crime. We went to Cuba for a day to see Castro (I went to talk to him for my book about peace in Colombia). GM (Ghislaine Maxwell) came to Colombia with a billionaire and another time with JE (Jeffrey Epstein).”
Based on all the information, the manifesto establishes 20 questions for Pastrana preceded by photographs or extracts from emails that support them.
Some of the questions are: What was the purpose of inviting Maxwell to the country? What type of contractual relationship resulted from that visit? Why was Maxwell (a foreign guest) wearing a Colombian Air Force uniform? Who was part of the chain of command that authorized that flight? What state resources were used for this visit to Tolemaida? Besides that experience, what other activities did you participate in with your guest, how were they financed, and how long did the visit last?
Other questions revolve around his relationship with the accused and his silence: When and how did you learn that Epstein was a pedophile and sex offender of minors? What was the nature of your relationship with Jean-Luc Brunel? Why did you mention in that email that you would see him “again”? How often did you meet with him and for what purpose? Why did you initially refer to sporadic contact with Epstein and Maxwell, and now evidence is emerging of a relationship that lasted for years? Why have you refused for more than five years to speak fully about this matter of public interest? Would you be willing to have a public conversation to answer these questions?
“[This letter] is the best example of good journalism. There isn’t a single fact that isn’t backed up by documents, statements and photos,” Mónica González Mujica, a Chilean journalist who shares responsibility for the Gabo Foundation’s Ethics Clinic, told LJR.
González summarizes the "good journalism" to which she refers in a single word: rigor. Never an unverified name, never a rumor—without sensationalism and without morbid fascination, she said. But always listening to the victims and providing details of what occurred.
“This letter […] which has not yet been answered by either Pastrana or the government, must and deserves to be answered, and we must insist,” she added.
The manifesto has succeeded in getting other media outlets to pick up the story. In addition to BBC Mundo, El País, Rolling Stone, and others have reported on the recent DOJ revelations and the demand for answers.
“I think it’s fine that other media outlets are asking the former president questions, but the way they ask and answer matters,” Mesa said. “A written exchange via WhatsApp isn’t the best way to ask these questions because of the sensitivity of the issues involved. You can’t ask follow-up questions, you can’t compare, and so on. It’s convenient for the former president to answer that way.”
Pastrana has not answered the questions in the manifesto but he did comment on it. He said that he had already provided explanations on the important issues (such as the Colombian Air Force flight), and said that labeling these explanations as unacceptable calls into question “my life, my morals, and my conduct.” The former president has received support, including from a group of 29 former advisors and cabinet members who published a public letter defending Pastrana’s “good name” and stating that the issue is being used for political purposes.
But for González, the insistence on asking questions is not persecution. Especially because in a case like Epstein's—which demonstrates the power of pedophilia and human trafficking networks—journalism is more necessary than ever.
“There is no harassment here, nor is there any harm to his good name. What exists here is a necessary and urgent need for explanations, because he served as President of the Republic—and while serving as president, Andrés Pastrana maintained those relationships, extending them even after he had become a former president,” González said.
Mesa also interprets Pastrana's remarks as a way to "divert the public conversation." The focus, she added, should be on demanding clarity because many of the events allegedly took place while he was president.
LJR attempted to contact the former president through his official website, but received no response as of publication.
González said she was unaware of any similar initiatives by journalists to unite and demand answers. She emphasized that, as part of journalistic ethics, good practices like these and humanism must be reinforced in cases as sensitive as sexual abuse.
“We must give immense recognition to this group of women—so important, so honest, so brave—who dare to speak out against a network like this,” she said. “Being able to clarify what lies behind it all, what underlies what goes unspoken beyond the abuse itself, is as important as the abuse. Because it’s the only way to turn the tide on impunity.”
The group of signatories seems to be growing every day. And while the women are being criticized, even by the public, the journalists in the group continue doing what should be done with these issues, Mesa said. That is, asking questions, verifying information, investigating, and providing the public with accurate information.
With their manifesto, they hope not only that the former president will answer the 20 questions, but that there will be a greater impact.
“Every day these questions go unanswered, other questions arise. This silence is not good for the country, but it's not good for the former president either,” Mesa said. “On the other hand, [the manifesto has] a higher message: the hope of becoming a society that doesn't let these things go unpunished. I do hope that we become a society that demands answers from those who have held power. In Colombia, we have been complacent with the ruling class, and that has to change, even if only a little.”
This article was translated with AI assistance and reviewed by Teresa Mioli
