Abelardo de la Espriella, a criminal defense attorney running on a security-focused platform modeled on those of Donald Trump and Nayib Bukele, won the first round of Colombia's presidential election on June 1 with 43.74% of the vote, ahead of left-wing Senator Iván Cepeda's 40.90% [1][5]. The result defied most pre-election polls that had favored Cepeda and eliminated traditional conservative candidate Paloma Valencia, who finished below 7% [1][4]. A runoff between de la Espriella and Cepeda is scheduled for later in June [5].
De la Espriella declared victory in a statement addressed to "compatriots, defenders of the homeland," saying more than 10 million Colombians "placed their trust in el Tigre" and that "in 21 days, we are going to change the history of Colombia forever" [5]. His platform centers on declaring armed groups military targets, building mega-prisons inspired by El Salvador's model, resuming aerial glyphosate fumigation of coca crops, and seeking U.S.-backed airstrikes against what he calls narco-terrorists [3][6][7]. In campaign speeches, he stated: "I will wipe out narco-terrorism and those who I've declared a military target like cockroaches, like rats. I will unleash upon them the wrath of God never seen before" [3]. His economic agenda, branded "Patria Milagro," includes a 7% annual growth target, tax cuts for businesses, deregulation, support for fracking, and the use of blockchain technology in public contracting [13].
President Gustavo Petro posted on social media that "as president, I do not accept the preliminary results," alleging without presenting evidence that the count included 800,000 additional people, and said he would accept only the official scrutiny [5][4]. Cepeda initially echoed that position, citing "information regarding a certain number of polling stations" with "atypical voting patterns" and stating he would comment only once electoral commissions clarified the matter [5]. Cepeda later acknowledged no evidence of irregularities had been found [1]. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum publicly backed Petro's questioning of the results and called for a thorough investigation [14].
Former head of the National Civil Registry Juan Carlos Galindo Vácha directly challenged Petro's allegations, stating: "Historically, in presidential elections, the difference between the preliminary count, which is unofficial, and the official scrutiny process is less than 1%. That alone undermines any claim by President Petro that there was fraud in the count" [5]. Political scientist Nadia Jimena Pérez Guevara described Petro's fraud claims as "not healthy" for Colombian democracy and warned that Cepeda's initial focus on that issue rather than speaking to supporters "gives ammunition to those who want to equate De la Espriella and Cepeda, when in reality they represent completely different styles of leadership" [4]. Political consultant Miguel Silva said: "By crying fraud so early, it's hard to bring more voters to the table" [1].
Regional right-wing leaders responded with congratulations. Chilean President José Antonio Kast wrote: "Una Colombia más libre y segura es una buena noticia para toda la región" (A freer and safer Colombia is good news for the entire region) [2]. Argentine President Javier Milei called the result an expression of "el anhelo de libertad y progreso del pueblo colombiano" (the Colombian people's desire for liberty and progress) and a rejection of the "failed socialist model" [2]. Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa endorsed de la Espriella for the runoff and criticized those questioning the results, stating: "Lamentablemente, ser mal perdedor es algo contagioso" (Unfortunately, being a bad loser is contagious) [2]. Valencia endorsed de la Espriella, as did former President Álvaro Uribe [3][5].
Political scientists attributed the first-round outcome to structural factors rather than a broad ideological conversion. Yan Basset said: "What really helped De la Espriella was Valencia's collapse. There was a tactical shift of rightwing voters towards De la Espriella, who appeared to be the safest rightwing candidate to reach the runoff" [4]. Pérez Guevara added that de la Espriella "managed to consolidate the vote of the dissatisfied citizen, not only those opposed to Petro and leftwing policies, but also people who are simply fed up with politics" [4]. Laura Bonilla, deputy director of the Peace and Reconciliation Foundation, noted a geographic divide: "In more central areas and closer to the capitals, people prioritise security," while coastal and border communities affected by armed conflict placed greater value on socioeconomic continuity after receiving "constant attention from the government" over the past four years [1].
Academic and international coverage framed de la Espriella's rise as part of a broader pattern across Latin America. William A. Booth, a lecturer in Latin American Studies at University College London, stated: "For about a decade now, the modern, neoliberal right has been increasingly eclipsed in Latin America — as elsewhere — by a transnational far right with important links to figures such as Trump, Bukele, Noboa, Milei, etcetera" [3]. He described de la Espriella's coalition as resembling those of Trump and former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro: "a coalition of robber barons, racists and a large mass of others who are confused or angered by the current state of politics or the economy" [3]. Chinese state media Xinhua labeled de la Espriella "极右翼" (far-right) and placed the election in the context of Latin America's political shift [19]. Russian agency Interfax described him as a "right-wing radical" and "Trump admirer" [20]. German outlet taz characterized the result as a "Rechtsruck" (rightward shift) [16], while the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, a German conservative foundation, framed him as a "conservative outsider" reflecting a conservative mood swing [17].
Booth also noted that Cepeda outperformed Petro's own first-round result from the previous election cycle, calling it the first time a left-wing government has had a chance to be re-elected in Colombian history: "Whatever happens in the second round, I think it's likely that the left are here to stay as a viable and popular electoral force" [3].
The election outcome carries implications beyond Colombia's borders. De la Espriella's past defense of Alex Saab, described as an alleged frontman for Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, complicates his positioning toward the Maduro government [3][10]. Reporting focused on Venezuela noted that the fate of approximately 2.8 million Venezuelan migrants in Colombia and bilateral security cooperation could shift depending on the runoff result [10][11]. A de la Espriella presidency could also affect U.S. sanctions policy toward Venezuela [11][12].
Cepeda has challenged de la Espriella to a debate ahead of the runoff, describing him as a "misogynist," "homophobe," and "lawyer for paramilitaries and drug traffickers" [4]. De la Espriella called Cepeda and Petro "a pair of delinquents" and "miserable criminals" [4]. Political strategist Miguel Jaramillo Lujan said of the three-week campaign ahead: "As the saying goes, whoever makes fewer mistakes will be the winner" [1].