Colombia's path to peace: Juliana Bustamante-Reyes looks into the system of justice provided in the recently achieved peace agreement.

AuthorBustamante-Reyes, Juliana

In 1964 the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) emerged as a guerrilla movement fighting against political exclusionism and social and economic inequality in Colombia, starting the longest internal armed conflict in the region.

For over 30 years, as acknowledged recently by President Juan Manuel Santos, successive governments have attempted to achieve a peace agreement in Colombia. Although some of those efforts resulted in some factions' demobilisation, it was not until 2012 that FARC committed to seriously pursue a peace accord with the government. This development owed much to the fact that the previous government, led by President Alvaro Uribe, had followed a policy of military victory against FARC, which, though unsuccessful in absolute terms, diminished its military power. This contributed to its willingness to enter negotiations.

President Santos's government, which took office in 2010, embarked on negotiations with the FARC in 2012. In August of that year the parties formally announced their agreement to begin negotiations covering the following topics:

* rural reform, since land, land rights and ownership were, perhaps, the original cause of the conflict;

* a framework for political participation by the FARC-EP in the country's politics;

* a ceasefire and decommissioning of weaponry;

* an agreement on solving the illegal drug-trafficking problem;

* a framework for post-war justice with victims as the central concern; and,

* implementation, verification and endorsement of those accords.

The negotiations began in November 2012 in Havana, Cuba. On 24 August 2016, the parties to the negotiation publicly announced that they had reached agreement on all items on the agenda. As a result of the 'Final Agreement for Ending the Conflict and Building a Stable and Lasting Peace', (1) a definitive ceasefire for both parties came into effect at 00:00 on 29 August, bringing the near six-decade-long conflict to an end. On 26 September 2016 in a pompous, yet moving ceremony in Cartagena, both parties formalised the peace agreement. Several heads of state and international public figures, including UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon, witnessed this historic event.

Despite this, the final decision to implement the accords lay with the Colombian people. Indeed, as the president announced at the beginning of the talks, the final agreement was to be subject to a referendum in which Colombians would decide to accept it or not. During September 2016 a political campaign on the accords took place, with serious contention within the country. While the world rejoiced over the news of peace in Colombia, the country itself was divided between those who were in favour (the 'YES' campaign) and those against it (the 'NO' campaign). Former President Uribe called for a 'NO' vote in the referendum, contributing to polarisation of the country. In the end, on 2 October 2016, the 'NO' campaign triumphed. A slight majority (less than 1 per cent) rejected the implementation of the accords as negotiated. (2) This outcome put the pressure on the government to hear the arguments of the 'NO' campaigners, go back to the negotiating table with FARC and produce a prompt solution to the inevitable crisis.

The political issues that arose from the campaign and the uncertainty that its outcome caused are enormous. However, given the fact that several arguments against the accords related to the issue of post-conflict justice, this article will focus on this most controversial and innovative aspect of the agreement, in particular the 'Special Jurisdiction For Peace' it creates under a transitional justice framework.

Transitional justice

Transitional justice 'describes a distinctive conception of law and justice in the context of political transformation'. (3) It is a set of several mechanisms--trials, truth commissions, reparations programmes, amnesties, among others--designed to deal with the effects of gross human rights violations, either by former oppressive regimes or in armed conflicts, with the aim of promoting the rule of law and justice in times of transition. It has a forward-looking approach aimed at the restoration of relationships, and considers, primarily, the victims' needs.

The holistic nature of transitional justice gives meaning to its many elements. Without a comprehensive interaction of all of them, they will not be able to bring reconciliation or lasting peace to a society. This is what Colombia's peace agreement and particularly the comprehensive system of justice attempts to do.

Crucial role

A distinctive feature of this negotiation process was (and still is as the re-negotiation of the agreement unfolds) the crucial role of the conflict's victims. The Victims' Law enacted on 11 June 2011 was a clear transitional justice instrument that laid the ground for a negotiation in which victims were meant to be the main concern. The law consists of several mechanisms to provide reparation to victims of the conflict. A particular section on land restitution has the same aim. Before the agreement was concluded, at least five delegations of victims attended the peace talks in Havana to share their concerns, needs and...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT