Palace of Justice in Colombia, located in the north of Bogotá, where the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court of Justice, the Council of State, and the Superior Council of the Judiciary also perform their functions. Photograph: Elías Rovielo
Guacamaya, August 28, 2025. The Constitutional Court of Colombia admitted an “unconstitutionality claim” against the creation of the Binational Special Economic Zone with Venezuela. The petition, filed by citizen David Jacobo Gómez Zamora, challenges the legality of the memorandum of understanding signed last July 17 by Presidents Gustavo Petro and Nicolás Maduro.
The claim’s argument is based on the premise that the agreement for the so-called “Zone of Peace, Union, and Binational Development” should be considered an international treaty that requires prior approval from the Colombian Congress. Furthermore, the request holds that “the implementation of the agreement could have concrete and harmful effects on national sovereignty and collective rights.”
Consequently, the court ordered the “carrying out of evidential procedures” on the case, including a request for the Colombian Government to provide a copy of the memorandum and details about the people involved in its negotiation and signing. Among the entities called upon are the Presidency, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism, and the Ministry of National Defense.
The binational agreement aims to promote growth and expansion in sectors such as commerce, industry, tourism, and transportation, to benefit the populations of the Venezuelan states of Táchira, Zulia, and the Colombian department of Norte de Santander. Its main objection from some sectors is the fear of legitimizing armed groups and drug trafficking in the area.
According to the memorandum, the alliance falls within the legal norms of each state and safeguards the sovereignty of both countries, besides having no binding effects. It will be valid for five years from its entry into force and will be automatically extended for equal periods unless either party notifies in writing its intention to terminate the effects.
Regarding the plaintiff, identified as David Jacobo Gómez Zamora, no significant information was found about his political views or academic or professional background. An inactive X profile since 2021, identified with his full name and the username @DavidJacoboGme1, describes him as a Law student at the Externado University of Colombia.
