Colombia heads to runoff as far-right De la Espriella edges left-wing Cepeda amid fraud claims

Change the history of Colombia in three weeks, or accept the tyranny
De la Espriella's promise to supporters at a Barranquilla rally, framing the runoff as a choice between transformation and the status quo.

De la Espriella secured 10.35M votes versus Cepeda's 9.75M, with traditional right candidate Paloma Valencia trailing at 6.9%, likely consolidating behind the far-right outsider. Petro and Cepeda contest the official count, citing 885,000 census discrepancies and irregular voting patterns, demanding judicial review before accepting results.

  • De la Espriella: 44% (10.35M votes); Cepeda: 41% (9.75M votes); Valencia: 6.9%
  • Runoff scheduled for June 21, 2026
  • Petro and Cepeda contest count, citing 885,000 census discrepancy
  • Armed groups in Colombia grew 15% to 25,278 members between Dec 2024 and July 2025
  • Government debt at 61.5% of GDP; 17.5 million eligible voters stayed home

Far-right candidate Abelardo de la Espriella won Colombia's first round with 44% against leftist Iván Cepeda's 41%, advancing to a June 21 runoff despite fraud allegations from Petro's camp.

Colombia woke Sunday to a country split almost evenly in half. The far-right lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella had won the first round of presidential voting with just over 44 percent—more than 10.3 million votes—edging out the leftist senator Iván Cepeda, who captured roughly 41 percent, or just under 9.8 million votes. The margin was narrow enough that both men will face each other again on June 21 in a runoff that will determine whether Colombia continues the leftward path begun under outgoing president Gustavo Petro, or swings sharply to the right, joining a regional tide that has already swept across much of Latin America.

But the moment of clarity was immediately clouded. Cepeda and Petro both rejected the preliminary count, alleging irregularities and demanding that the courts verify the results before either candidate would accept them. Cepeda pointed to a discrepancy of 885,000 voters between the official census and the private software system used to tabulate ballots, and said he had evidence of anomalous voting patterns across hundreds of polling stations. Petro was more direct, declaring on social media that he would not recognize the count from the private firm run by the Bautista brothers, and that he would only accept results certified by judicial commissions. The president suggested that hundreds of thousands of votes had been artificially added to De la Espriella's total. Yet despite these objections, both camps acknowledged that a runoff would proceed as scheduled.

De la Espriella, known colloquially as "the tiger," celebrated before thousands of supporters gathered at the waterfront in Barranquilla. He promised to "change the history of Colombia" in the next three weeks and to "defeat tyranny and absolutism"—his characterization of Petro's government. He warned that if anyone tried to overturn the election results, the people would rise up and punish them. The 54-year-old criminal defense attorney has built his political brand as an outsider, a man untainted by traditional politics, and his campaign has focused on shrinking the state, cutting ministries, and freeing markets from what he calls the suffocating hand of government.

Cepeda, by contrast, represents the establishment left. A senator and one of the architects of Colombia's peace agreement with the FARC guerrillas, he comes from a family marked by leftist commitment and state violence. His father, a senator with the Patriotic Union party, was assassinated in 1994 by state agents working with right-wing paramilitaries. His mother was a communist activist. He studied law at a university where a Marxist professor shaped his thinking. Now 61, Cepeda has positioned himself as the guardian of Petro's social agenda—expanded welfare, a 23.7 percent increase in the minimum wage, aid to vulnerable households—while also promising to root out corruption, a subtle dig at Petro's administration.

The ideological gulf between the two men is vast. De la Espriella opposes abortion rights, rejects feminism, and wants to ban same-sex adoption and euthanasia. He has declared himself a follower of Donald Trump and El Salvador's Nayib Bukele, and has suggested Colombia should withdraw from the United Nations. Cepeda defends state investment in social programs and has been a persistent critic of the former president Álvaro Uribe, even pushing for Uribe's conviction on charges related to witness tampering—a conviction that was later overturned, though Cepeda has appealed that reversal.

The first-round results suggest that the traditional right, represented by Paloma Valencia, has fractured. Valencia, backed by Uribe's party, finished third with just 6.9 percent of the vote. Both Valencia and Uribe have already announced their support for De la Espriella in the runoff, a consolidation that could prove decisive. Cepeda, aware that nearly 17.5 million eligible voters stayed home on Sunday, has called on them to return to the polls, betting that higher turnout might favor his side.

Columbia arrives at this moment of political choice amid economic strain. The government's debt has swelled to 61.5 percent of GDP, up 7 percent from the previous year. Foreign investment in oil and mining—traditional pillars of state revenue—has weakened. Armed groups, including FARC dissidents and the National Liberation Army, have grown more active and more numerous, with their ranks expanding by 15 percent between December 2024 and mid-2025, reaching over 25,000 members when including support networks. The sense of insecurity has deepened even as Petro's government has pursued peace talks. These conditions have shaped the election, with voters torn between those who believe the left's social spending offers protection and those convinced that only a smaller, leaner state can restore order and prosperity.

The runoff will test whether Colombia's electorate, deeply polarized and suspicious of both camps, will choose continuity or rupture. The fraud allegations hanging over the first round add another layer of uncertainty. Whatever happens on June 21, the country will emerge from this election more divided than before.

The called count transmitted has no binding force. As president, I do not accept the results of the preliminary count from the private firm of the Bautista brothers.
— President Gustavo Petro, via social media
There is a discrepancy we want to verify regarding the electoral census. We are talking about 885,000 people, and we want that clarified. There is also information and signs of an indeterminate number of polling stations with atypical voting patterns.
— Iván Cepeda, in his election night statement
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Inventor

Why did the traditional right collapse so completely? Paloma Valencia got less than 7 percent.

Model

Because De la Espriella positioned himself as the real outsider—not just right-wing, but anti-establishment. Valencia represented the old guard, the people who've held power for decades. Voters who wanted change on the right saw De la Espriella as the genuine alternative.

Inventor

And Cepeda's fraud claims—how serious are they?

Model

Serious enough that the president himself is refusing to accept the preliminary count. They're pointing to 885,000 people unaccounted for in the census, and voting patterns they say are statistically impossible. Whether it's actual fraud or just the chaos of a massive election, the courts will have to sort it out.

Inventor

But the runoff is happening anyway?

Model

Yes. Both sides have accepted that there will be a second round on June 21. Cepeda is betting that if more people vote, he wins. De la Espriella is betting that the right consolidates behind him—and Uribe's already endorsed him.

Inventor

What's the economic picture that brought us here?

Model

Debt is up, foreign investment in oil and mining is down, and armed groups have grown by 15 percent in less than a year. Petro's government increased the minimum wage by nearly a quarter and expanded welfare, but the economy only grew 2.2 percent in the first quarter. People feel less secure, not more.

Inventor

So this is really about whether the left's social spending or the right's smaller state wins?

Model

That's the core of it. But it's also about whether Colombians trust an outsider lawyer who admires Trump, or a senator from a communist family who helped broker peace with guerrillas. The country is genuinely split.

Quieres la nota completa? Lee el original en 20 Minutos ↗
Contáctanos FAQ