Banco de la República regrets the erroneous interpretations made of its request to the Constitutional Court

The Bank of the Republic's management regretted the misinterpretations given to the requests the bank submitted to the high court last week, in a letter sent to the Constitutional Court, regarding the timing of the entry into force of Law 2381, or the pension reform, if said law is declared enforceable.

According to the Issuer, the proposals made in the letter " had no purpose other than to seek clarity and propose a reasonable timeframe for compliance with the law, in accordance with the decision of the Constitutional Court."

The Colombian monetary authority's statement comes after President Gustavo Petro, who was aware of the content of the letter sent to the Court, wrote on his social media account X: "Definitive: we are facing a new maneuver to prevent the pension reform. Never seen before."

In another message, President Petro clarified that he does not believe the Constitutional Court will go against the pension reform, but he again rejected the request for a postponement. "What I do see are attempts from various quarters to hinder the implementation of the reform," he stated.

In its recent communication regretting this misinterpretation of its petition, the Bank of the Republic recalled that its message to the Constitutional Court has two purposes: first, to clarify the Court's interpretation of the validity of the Law and the decrees issued during its regulatory process, which it considers essential to moving forward on issues such as the signing of the contract between the Bank of the Republic and the Ministry of Finance; the selection of external administrators; and the appointment of the members of the Steering Committee of the FAPC (Contributory Pillar Savings Fund) by the Board of the issuing bank.

" Work had been underway on these issues, but the process was interrupted following the publication of the Court's June 17, 2025, statement announcing its decision to "suspend, as of today, the entry into force of the provisions of Law 2381 of 2024 until the day following the date on which the Full Court makes a final decision on the constitutionality of said law," the bank's management stated in its new communication.

The second purpose of the letter, the bank adds, is to request the Court to set a reasonable timeframe to advance the proceedings that, for reasons beyond the Bank's control, were already delayed and were interrupted as of June 17.

He added that it was suggested that the law's entry into force not be the day after the decision on its constitutionality, but rather three months after the respective ruling is issued.

"A preliminary reading of the Constitutional Court's press release could imply that all pending proceedings would have to be conducted between the date the law's constitutionality is decided and the day immediately following, which is impractical from a practical standpoint," the monetary authority insisted.