Release of FARC held prisoners facilitated by Colombianas por la paz (Photo credit: Telesur)

On 4 October 2011, after a military campaign lasting several years , involving several thousand Colombian Special Forces and with a still unidentified cost in terms of civilian victims, troop casualties, and Colombian pesos, the Colombian Army killed the FARC chief, alias Alfonso Cano. It is the first time FARC, the world’s oldest active guerrilla organisation, has had its leader killed in combat and has led to claims in certain sectors that the death of the guerrilla leader has brought Colombia closer to peace. Whilst undoubtedly a military success for the Colombian Army, one must ask if a military solution is the answer to the Colombian conflict. Does the continued militarisation of Colombia bring peace closer? Will continued military victories eradicate the structural causes of the armed, political and social conflicts that exist in Colombia? Or is there a need for a different approach?

Photo credit: http://www.rioja2.com

The initiative began with an exchange of letters, published publicly, in which the movement sought to promote a dialogue with Colombia’s two largest guerrilla groups, FARC and ELN. The aim of the letters was to discuss openly with the guerrillas the desire to bring peace to Colombia through negotiation. This effort began with a call for the end to the use of kidnapping as a tool of war and for the release of all prisoners being held by the guerrillas in the mountains of Colombia. Indeed this effort produced positive results. Since its creation, Colombianas y colombianos por la paz has been instrumental in securing the unilateral release of 20 prisoners of war held captive by guerrilla groups. In addition to the release of prisoners, the last year has been characterised by a series of statements from both the guerrilla groups and the Colombian government regarding the possibility of a negotiated solution to the Colombian conflict – not forgetting that these statements were made in the context of a conflict that continued and continues causing deaths on all sides.

Alfonso Cano, real name Guillermo León Sáenz Vargas, was seen by the peace movement as a solid negotiating partner with whom future talks were a real possibility. ‘By prioritising armed confrontation instead of a political solution brought about through dialogue and negotiation, the Government is showing that it lacks a real program for peace’. It was the logic of war rather than the logic of peace that demanded his death. As commented by the respected Colombian academic Carlos Medina Gallego , the military logic that dictates that your enemy can be bombed to the negotiating table will only serve to continue the cycle of violence and further exacerbate the conflict.

In their press release following the death of Alfonso Cano, Colombianas y colombianos por la paz declared its commitment to continue in its efforts to create spaces for dialogue and negotiation:

From Colombianas y colombianos por la paz we believe that there have already been too many deaths in our country and that the bloodshed must stop. For this reason we will continue working to achieve peace with social justice and not for the peace offered by the establishment that is conceived in terms of cemeteries or prison cells – the only thing that this achieves is the never ending prolongation of the war

No related posts.

Watch Women, War & Peace Trailer on PBS. See more from Women War and Peace.

Innocent women increasingly bear the costs of war. The new forms of war that have developed in the aftermath of the Cold War, including a proliferation of small arms in developing countries, have seen women becoming targets of violence and rape tactics. The series explores this sad and disturbing reality in an episode outlining the story of 16 women in the Balkans seeking justice and a review of sexual violence laws.

The tremendous endeavour shown by these women’s fights for their rights is but one aspect of women’s issues in war and peace. Women have a clear ability to contribute to peacemaking and peacebuilding initiatives . The series helps to shed light on the question: what is it that women can contribute to peace building that men cannot or do not?

The series tackles these issues through five stories:

1. The legal fight of 16 women in Bosnia who had been imprisoned and raped by Serb-led forces (I Came to Testify)
2. The struggle for peace of a group of Liberian women who took on warlords and the Charles Taylor dictatorship (Pray the Devil Back to Hell)
3. The campaign by three Afghan women to ensure that women’s rights are protected in peace talks with the Taliban (Peace Unveiled)
4. The story of two women in Colombia standing up for those that have been terrorized and forcibly displaced as a modern war strategy (The War We Are Living)
5. A concluding episode, summarising the challenge to the conventional wisdom that war and peace are men’s domain (War Redefined)

The importance of these issues is unquestionable, and the series is a welcome initiative that should be built upon in raising awareness of changes that must inevitably take place: firstly, women affected by war must be given better protection, and secondly, that women should be consulted about every peace endeavour no matter what the level.

Related posts:

1. Nobel Peace Prize Winner Inspired 3P back in 2003 One of this year’s three Nobel Peace Prize winners is...
2. November 2011 A monthly selection of the best new research and resources...
3. Why talking peace is essential and why it is threatened Bill Richardson, former US Ambassador to the United Nations, Melanie...

What laws can be developed in a conflict zone in order to bring about justice and advance the possibility of peace? Is it possible whilst the conflict and the conditions causing it continue to exist?

In Colombia, a civil war has raged for several decades. It is a conflict that has left literally millions of victims. The state has been involved both implicitly and explicitly in much of the violence against these victims. For the Colombian state and in the Colombian context therefore, these questions are indeed pertinent ones.

In August 2010, Juan Manuel Santos was elected as the new Colombian president. His government has pushed forward a new victims law that according to the law’s creators will offer compensation to around 4 million victims of the Colombian conflict.

There are however concerns from certain sectors, particularly from human rights and victims organisations. We speak with the human rights organisation Yira Castro about the law and its capacity to address successfully the issue of the victims of the Colombian conflict.

Related posts:

1. The Importance of IDP Organisations in Colombia In a country with more than 4 million IDPs and...
2. The Importance of IDP Organisations in Colombia Article 20. (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of...
3. Colombia: A new chance for peace? At the beginning of November FARC leader Alfonso Cano was...

In 1997, in response to a series of atrocities against the civilian population, the people of San José de Apartadó took the decision to resist. Without arms, without violence, but a resistance based on a vision to create a new reality in which a community could live in peace.  From its very first days, the process has been aggressively rejected – most notably from the Colombian state itself. However, and in spite of the often unimaginable grief experienced during the 14 year process, the Peace Community continues, firm in its conviction that silent suffering is not the path.

The creation of a peace community

On the 23 March 1997 in the small village of San José, in the municipality of Apartadó, a ‘Peace Community’ was declared. Its members, rural farmers forcibly displaced from their homes in San José, declared themselves neutral towards all armed actors involved in the conflict – whether guerrilla groups, paramilitaries or state forces. With this decision the Peace Community sought a solution to the unrelenting persecution they suffered being deliberately involved in the armed conflict – most notably under accusations of collaborating with the guerilla forces operating in the region.

In June and July 1996, more than 800 rural farmers left their homes and camped out in a sports hall to demand an end to the crimes being committed against them. In spite of the agreements reached between state institutions and the rural farmer population, the months that followed the protest saw a systematic campaign to wipe out the community’s leaders. In the course of 1996 the founding member of the village was killed and four more leaders were massacred in an operation which, according to various witness reports, was carried out by members of the army. With another massacre carried out in February 1997 killing four more, the Peace Community was founded in the hope that the neutrality of the community would be respected, as dictated under international humanitarian law, and as such the bloodshed would end.

The creation of the San José de Apartadó Peace Community was a proposal offering an alternative way of life. This alternative is founded on the principle of ‘community’, conscious always of the impact that our actions will have on others. This philosophy inevitably demands a respect for the principle of plurality and difference. Indeed people from all races and all political backgrounds are welcome in the Peace Community. There is also a specific emphasis on the peaceful resolution of conflicts; the promotion of dialogue which seeks collective solutions prioritising the well-being of all those involved.

The persecution of a peace community

With around 1,200 members, the San José de Apartadó Peace Community recently completed its 14th year. 14 years full of suffering. Located in the region of Urabá, San José is situated in a paramilitary stronghold. The paramilitaries, armed groups initially formed to protect large land holders and business interests, unified in 1997 under the banner of the ‘Autodefensas unidas de Colombia’ (AUC). Heavily involved in the drugs trade, the paramilitaries have been responsible for focused and deliberate persecution of the civilian population. Collaboration with state institutions has been widespread and systematic. Although officially demobilised, the paramilitary forces still enjoy a heavy presence across Colombia, and in Urabá particularly.

Since its creation, almost 200 members of the Peace Community have been killed. Immediately after the formation of the Peace Community, the reaction from the army and paramilitary units was made clear. Army helicopters bombed from above as members of the Community were told that if they did not leave they would be killed, and three days after its creation a series of murders were carried out. With the Peace Community declared only days before, the rural farmers were forced to leave their land as they grouped together in a nearby village centre. On numerous occasions the community had to live with paramilitary checkpoints where many were disappeared or killed. The army consistently refused to recognise their existence. Over the last 14 years, the Peace Community has continued to suffer at the hands of the army and the paramilitaries. The most notable massacre took place in 2005 when eight people were killed by members of the Colombian army with logistical support from paramilitaries. The Community has been forcibly displaced on numerous occasions – between 2003 and 2004 on seven occasions. There are also reports that three members of the Peace Community have been raped by army soldiers. Indeed, the state has played a leading role in the persecution of this Peace Community. The neutrality of the Community and its decision to take an alternative path is seen as justification for persecution as those who do not collaborate with the army are seen as enemies.

The persecution continues

During 2011, the violence against the Peace Community has once again intensified. Once more the Peace Community has had to speak out against the crimes being experienced. In spite of the change of presidents and a new discourse that talks of a greater commitment to defend the rights of the civilian population, the realities being denounced by the San José de Apartadó Peace Community paint a very different picture.

On 22 March 2011 the Community suffered another murder at the hands of the paramilitaries. In the early hours of the evening, five minutes from a military checkpoint, two paramilitaries on a motorbike shot dead Bernardo Londoño, 27-years-old and an ex-member of the Peace Community. In the weeks leading up to the murder, the Community had released information to the authorities about threats by army members and paramilitaries. Nothing was done to protect the population. After the murder, the threats and violations have continued. Paramilitaries have threatened members of the community telling them that if they don’t leave they will suffer at the hands of operations being planned with the army, while the army has been destroying crops. One of the Community’s leaders was detained for two hours in an army checkpoint. He was insulted, accused of helping the guerrilla, and was told that if they see him again they will kill him.

The construction of an alternative continues

In the Peace Community the work goes on, the conviction is still strong, and the will to continue speaking out against the abuses remains.

Amidst this darkness, we continue believing in Life although we see ourselves besieged by Death … We know that with so much death, the hope of life appears to drown. But this is not the case, the opposite is true. It grows stronger

Regardless of the costs, the San José de Apartadó Peace Community has shown that it will continue to resist and that it will continue on its path in the search of peace.

Related posts:

1. Interview with a Leader of a Peace Community in Urabá, Colombia Jesús Emilio Tuberquia is a leader of the San José...
2. For true peace, first there must be justice In the heart of Putumayo, one of the most troubled...
3. Urgent appeal: Help for Colombia, protection for San José de Apartadó! This is an urgent call for support. The inhabitants of...

This is an urgent call for support. The inhabitants of the Peace Community San José de Apartadó, with whom we have been and are connected in deep friendship and intense cooperation for years, need our help now. The Colombian Peace Community is again massively under threat on various levels. In such situations we’ve often experienced that international attention can save the live of innocent people. Giving a few minutes of our time can have an important effect.

What is the situation?

For 14 years, San José de Apartadó has been a neutral village between the forces of the violent conflict in Colombia – 1300 farmers and refugees united in a non-violent resistance to oppose the massive displacements in their areas. Almost 200 of the inhabitants have been murdered by paramilitary forces, guerrilla forces and the regular military. Despite this, the peace community has persevered and managed to tie an international network of support. In the meantime, numerous other peace communities have developed in Colombia. They are like a seed of hope in a land that has been being governed by violence for decades.

During the last years the situation of the Peace Community seemed to have stabilized. In the last months, however, death threats, coming particularly from the paramilitary forces, have become frequent and alarming again. Fighting in the region has become more intense, rumors against the Peace Community are being spread, people from neighboring communities are being intimidated, and members of the Peace Community are being threatened. Now the state is even seizing land that the peace community has been working for years and is giving it to former members of the paramilitary.

On March 22nd, one day before the celebration of the 14th anniversary of the Peace Community, Bernardo Rios Londoño was murdered. He was a former member of the Peace Community, his wife and his children are still living in San Josecito. Just before the murder happened, paramilitary soldiers were seen. They were following a spokesman of the Peace Community, Jesús Emílio Tuberquia, but backed off when they saw that he was accompanied by internationals.

How you can help

Amnesty International finds the current situation so dangerous that they have started a campaign. We ask all of you to participate: Please go to: http://ua.amnesty.ch/urgent-actions/2011/04/103-11 (The page will open in German, but you can change the language using the menu in the yellow bar, and there are documents with further information in English, German or French on the right-hand side of the page).

There, you will find further information, a pre-written letter (in Spanish), and addresses. Please use this letter or write a letter in your own words and send it by regular mail to the listed addresses. Please take the time to do this; international attention has often saved lives in Colombia before.

Greetings in Solidarity and warm thanks!

Andrea Phoebe Regelmann, May 2011.

In this video Adam Isaacson from the US-based organisation Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) speaks with Jesús Emilio Tuberquia during his trip to Washington in October 2010.

Related posts:

1. Interview with a Leader of a Peace Community in Urabá, Colombia Jesús Emilio Tuberquia is a leader of the San José...
2. Colombia: Key people and parties The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de...
3. Colombia Colombia has experienced an intense intrastate conflict for over half...

Citizens’ Assembly for Truth

In the heart of Putumayo, one of the most troubled regions in Colombia, a coalition of grass-roots and human rights organisations held a two day event offering an opportunity for reflection, analysis and the highlighting of the reality being lived in the region. The ‘Citizens’ Assembly for Truth‘ offered an integral space to the region’s many victims of the conflict. Human rights lawyers offered their assistance taking record of the hundreds of cases as the victims of Putumayo seek an end to the humanitarian crisis and an end to the impunity that continues to reign throughout Colombia.

Putumayo: Conflict zone

Putumayo has lived and continues to live the most extreme of the country’s armed conflict. One of Colombia’s 32 departamentos, Putumayo lies in the South-west with its limits forming an international border with Ecuador and Peru. This geographical location in the South-west border region, alongside the presence and heavy exploitation of oil and the cultivation of the coca crop since the 1980′s, has undoubtedly contributed to its fate. There has been heavy guerrilla presence for several decades.

FARC-EP the country’s largest left wing guerrilla group has maintained a strong influence in the region with its Frente 32 and Frente 48. Towards the end of last year and in the first few months of the current year, the guerrilla has mounted a series of attacks against Colombian police and armed forces. One attack left 8 policemen dead in one of the most serious losses suffered by the security forces in recent times.

There is heavy militarisation from state armed forces as the military seeks to combat the guerrilla and maintain control in areas where oil exploitation is being carried out. Plan Colombia, a US aid package which has supplied Colombia with over 6 billion dollars in predominantly military aid has hit the region hard as indiscriminate aerial fumigation and forced manual eradication, a fundamental part of the bilateral agreement, has caused widespread damage and led to the continued forced displacement of Putumayo’s citizens.

“It is presented as a success [Plan Colombia],” remarked Mario, a campesino leader forming part of the coalition of regional grass-roots organisations (La Mesa departamental de organizaciones sociales, campesinas, indigenas, afrodescendientes del Putumayo) who, alongside the human rights organisation Comité permanente por la defensa de los Derechos Humanos (CPDH), played a key role in the organisation of the event. “They talk of security gains and a reduction in poverty levels. But for the campesinos it has brought misery, forced displacement and death.” And there is the continued paramilitary presence. A presence that continues even after their almost ten year reign of horror was supposedly ended with the government supported demobilisation of the paramilitary unit operating in the region, the Frente Sur Putumayo, in March 2006.

Paramilitary destruction

Although paramilitary violence was already present in Putumayo during the 80′s and early 90′s, it was in 1997 with the arrival of the unified paramilitary forces Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC) that their true damage was inflicted on Putumayo’s population. The AUC was a paramilitary army guilty of carrying out often unimaginable crimes across Colombia during the 1990′s and 2000′s until their demobilisation in the middle of the last decade. Maintaining a strategy of using brutal violence and massacres to instil fear into the population, they caused massive displacement taking control of huge swaths of territory for their drug trafficking or the business interests of their associates. They enjoyed widespread support from the state with military officials, police commanders, intelligence chiefs, politicians, members of the justice system, and relatives of the President guilty of deeply entrenched collaboration. Although they officially demobilised under a government run initiative, they continue to act and enjoy vast influence in various parts of the country – Putumayo inevitably included. A recently released UN human rights report (pdf) highlights these paramilitary successor groups and their widespread collusion with state forces.

In Putumayo the Frente Sur Putumayo is held responsible for crimes leaving 5,500 victims. Entering into the region under the premise of defeating the guerrilla, they brutally massacred the civilian population to take control of territory and the drugs trade. Colombia’s public prosecutor’s office, La Fiscalía, estimates that 3,000 murdered victims are buried in mass graves. Several now infamous massacres were carried out. Victims were dismembered, often whilst still alive. And several ex-paramilitary soldiers report the collaboration and support from state forces. Although this paramilitary group has officially demobilised and the much criticised Justice and Peace law – a law introduced in 2005 giving a degree of amnesty to ex-paramilitary fighters in exchange for testimonies – has allowed certain truths to become public, the victims are still a long way from obtaining justice.

One young victim, Pablo Oswaldo, present at the ‘Citizens’ Assembly for Truth‘ told his story. On the 15 February 2003 travelling along the river in the Puerto Guzman municipality his boat was attacked by three paramilitaries. Without a word the paramilitaries opened fire. Seven civilians were travelling on the boat. Six were killed, including Pablo’s father. Pablo was 14 years old at the time, finishing his secondary education. The young student and only survivor of the massacre lost his right arm. He studied no more as he was forced to live a new life. He has received no assistance from the state. He has heard nothing regarding the investigation into the crime. Impunity reigns.

Continued paramilitary violence

Under new names, the paramilitary forces continue to enjoy a heavy presence and a significant social control in the region. Las Águilas Negras (the Black Eagles) and Los Rastrojos (the Stubble) continue to threaten, instil fear and commit atrocities. On the very day the event was taking place  there was a stark reminder of this reality. A member of the Mesa departamental de organizaciones sociales, campesinas, indigenas, afrodescendientes del Putumayo denounced to the audience that on 11 February five civilians were massacred including a 5 year old girl who had her hands cut off and her throat slit. The coalition of grass-roots and human-rights organisations demanded that state authorities investigate the paramilitary presence in the region. There were also demands that the Colombian Army comply with its obligation to protect the civilian population – particularly as members of the armed forces were positioned in the surrounding area to where the massacre took place. One of those killed in the massacre was a community leader. Indeed, with the continued existence of these paramilitary successor groups, community leaders, social activists, human rights defenders, even victims denouncing the crimes committed against them, live in an environment of permanent risk. With no justice and continued impunity the perpetrators of these crimes will continue to sow terror across Putumayo as they know there will be no recrimination. The organisations defending the interests of the communities and their victims  will continue to be threatened. And, as such, the victims will continue to be ‘re-victimised’ pushing even further into the distance the possibility of achieving justice.

The victims of Putumayo

With the objective to highlight this reality, strengthen the unity of Putumayo’s civil society, and demand an end to impunity, over 800 members of the Putumayo community attended the two day public event. Delegates from the almost 30 regional organisations forming part of the grass-roots coalition travelled from across the departamento. A series of human rights organisations, including CPDH, provided a total of 20 professionals who provided legal and psychological support to the victims. A total of 390 cases were recorded with 37 of these cases of often incomprehensible tragedy presented from the stage by their courageous victims. Extra-judicial executions carried out by the army, forced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, torture by state forces, forced displacement, death threats, bombardments and the arbitrary fumigation of crops were all reported.

A delegate from a teacher’s association, Asosiación de Educadores del Putumayo, reported how 20 teachers had been killed since 1997. In not a single case has a charge been made.

We heard how one two-year-old girl lost her leg after three army helicopters attacked her nursery. After the attack she was refused entry at the local hospital for not having the correct papers, was later sent to the capital but it was too late to save her from having her limb amputated.

Numerous campesinos denounced the impact of the aerial fumigations carried out by the Colombian military as part of Plan Colombia. A campesina told us how in November 1999, 20 days after bathing in a stream that had been recently  fumigated with the Glyphosate chemical used by the Colombian military in the fumigations, her husband fell ill – four days later he died. Others reported the destruction of their crops: corn, beans, plantain, rice, cassava, all arbitrarily fumigated as part of the government’s US backed anti-narcotics program. They have received no compensation.

A trade-unionist and leader of sugar-cane workers informed the audience of his ordeal. An emblematic case demonstrating the ‘victimisation’ and ‘re-victimisation’ suffered by so many community activists and human rights defenders. In August 2002 he had 7 Ha (1 Hectare is equal to 2.5 acres) of sugar-cane destroyed by aerial fumigations. He carried on. In July 2003 he had 22 Ha of sugar-cane cultivated and ready for harvest. At the beginning of that month came the second fumigation destroying once more his entire crop. As he sought justice for his damaged crops he received nothing less than attacks  from paramilitaries, accusations of growing sugar-cane for the guerrilla from the the state’s criminal investigation unit (CTI), and a series of arrest warrants which led to his detention for rebellion. He was released after eight days.

An end to impunity

Colombia’s high impunity rate is alarming. According to the Washington based human rights organisation US Office on Colombia, of 784 human rights defenders threatened, attacked, or assassinated (pdf) between 2002 and 2009, only ten cases have seen a conviction. Indeed UN officials have repeatedly manifested their concern, again questioning government achievements in their recently released annual human rights report. But it is not just the impunity that is of concern. Instead of receiving positive judicial results, the victims are often confronted with further threats, attacks or even legal processes.

Before the close of the event, the 390 cases were collected together and, with the backing of a senator and two house representatives, were presented to a delegate from the public prosecutor’s office. The coalition of grass-roots and human rights organisations have acted and will continue to act in the search of an end to impunity and a new social reality for Putumayo. The responsibility lies also with the public institutions to comply with their obligations, to push for an end to impunity, and to provide justice for the victims of Putumayo and the many more across Colombia.

As Mario the campesino leader succinctly affirmed, “for true peace, first there must be justice.”

(The names in the article have been changed)

Related posts:

1. Colombia: Key people and parties The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de...
2. Colombia: an analysis of the new ‘Victims Law’ In August 2010, Juan Manuel Santos was elected as the...
3. Interview with a Leader of a Peace Community in Urabá, Colombia Jesús Emilio Tuberquia is a leader of the San José...

The Peace Community, set up in 1997, seeks to create a zone for the civilian population of San Jose de Apartadó to live in peace. It maintains complete neutrality in the conflict and prohibits the presence of any armed group inside its territory. However, as is often the case in Colombia, this neutrality has not saved the community from the conflict. It has on the contrary led to their stigmatisation and continued persecution. Neutrality is stigmatised by those whose interests are served by following the War on Terror “with us or against us” logic. The community has been victim to a prolonged campaign seeking to accuse its members of guerrilla collaboration. Using made up declarations from supposed ex-guerrilla combatants, government officials and even the ex-President have made false accusations against the community in attempts to damage its image and legitimise the horrific persecution against its members.

In just August last year another member of the community was killed. Over 180 have been killed since 1997.

In this video Adam Isaacson from the US-based organisation Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) speaks with Jesús Emilio Tuberquia during his trip to Washington in October 2010.

Colombia’s San José de Apartadó Peace Community from Adam Isacson on Vimeo.

For more information on the massacre at San José de Apartadó, go to this Verdad Abierta page (Spanish).

Hasan Dodwell, Colombia Local Correspondent. 13 January 2010.

Related posts:

1. Urgent appeal: Help for Colombia, protection for San José de Apartadó! This is an urgent call for support. The inhabitants of...
2. Colombia: Key people and parties The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de...
3. A peace community’s unrelenting commitment to peace In rural Colombia, choosing to follow a path of peace...

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Freedom of association is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. In this sense, diverse international and national instruments recognise this right as fundamental.

In a country with more than 4 million IDPs and many violations of Human Rights, International Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law organisations represent the best way to demand juridical action on the application of constitutional guarantees.

In Colombia there are important legal instruments with the objective of monitoring and evaluating policies relating to IDPs. The aim is to generate space for participation, and effective and timely participation processes under the coordination of the National System for Integral Attention to the Displaced Population- (Sistema Nacional de Atención Integral a la Población Desplazada – SNAIPD).

At same time however many IDP organisations in Colombia are facing serious problems. The Colombian Constitutional Court has been denounced by various governmental, non-governmental and international organisations. Additionally it is well known that the leaders and representatives of displaced people are often subjected to persecution, threats, attacks, murder, torture, detention, and false accusations, often at the hands of armed groups operating outside the law.

The Colombia Constitutional Court in the decision Auto No. 200 of August 13, 2007, noted that the right to life and personal security of leaders and representatives of IDPs in special risk situations requires urgent action by the authorities for the purpose of ensuring their protection to allow them to continue the process of overcoming the unconstitutional situation in the field of internal displacement in the country. In this decision the Colombia Constitutional Court declared that the inhumane living conditions for the country’s IDPs were unconstitutional and ordered the authorities to take action.

Those threatened are in an incredibly difficult situation but often continue to work on behalf of the communities; such work should be encouraged by the Colombian state and not ignored.

One example of this situation is presented by of the League of Displaced Women (LMD) and the City of Women. They warn of the continued risk and vulnerability for participants:

“Despite the national and international charges (accusations) made by the League, just as with the repeated warnings from the System of Early Alerts from the Public Defender, they continue to be victimised by violations of their human rights.” http://www.ligademujeresdesplazadas.org/magazine/seccion.asp?id=130

The women in Colombia and many other places around the world suffer from serious violations of their Human Rights; in situations of armed conflict their conditions are often even worse.

The general situation and the added threat to their safety represent a serious obstacle to the attainment of dignity and inclusion of female victims of forced displacement.

Conclusion

Although in Colombia there are some important mechanisms for the participation of organisations for victims of forced displacement, the conditions facing the leaders of such organisations makes the vindication of human dignity a very difficult job.

Currently the Colombian State has not fulfilled its obligations to protect the Right to life and security of the victims of forced displacement, or their leaders or representatives.

Freedom of Association is one of the most important opportunities IDPs have to enhance their community participation. It is therefore a clear obligation of governments to promote the participation of IDPs in such organisations.

Juan Pablo Serrano Frattali, August 2010. This article does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Insight on Conflict or Peace Direct.

For more information, see Liderazgo Para La Paz.

Related posts:

1. The Importance of IDP Organisations in Colombia Article 20. (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of...
2. Colombia: Conflict Resources General Amnesty International: Reports and documents on humanitarian issues in...
3. UN and Sri Lanka Last week, the General Secretary of United Nations, Ban-Ki-Moon proposed...

The first round of voting took place at the end of May and the two remaining candidates will learn their fate as voters once again take to the urns. In one corner is the close Uribe ally and ex-Minister of Defence Juan Manuel Santos. In the rival corner is the surprise phenomenon, the ex-Mayor of Bogotá, Antanas Mockus.

Whilst on the surface the campaign revolves around a choice between continuity or change, and whilst there are indeed certain key differences between the candidates, on many of the key issues they both promise much of the same.

On the campaign for continuity is Juan Manuel Santos, a member of the elite Santos family; the family controls the country’s principal broadsheet, El Tiempo, and his cousin, Francisco Santos, is the current vice-President. His period as Minister of Defence was extremely controversial. The bombing of a FARC camp in Ecuador in 2008 broke international law and killed numerous civilians as well as the guerrilla commander Raul Reyes. Indeed the Ecuadorian judicial system has recently taken out a warrant for his arrest. He has faced also continued condemnation from international human rights organisations for his presiding over the Colombian military’s systematic campaign of murdering innocent civilians and dressing them up as guerrilla fighters. Recent reports have suggested the number of murders committed by the military, in  what is known as the ‘false-positive’ scandal, exceeds 2,000. Judicial investigations are ongoing although until now impunity has reigned.

His campaign has promised a continuation of the militaristic policy of Álvaro Uribe, also known as the policy of ‘Democratic Security’, unshakeable support for foreign investment, and a continuation of the close military relationship with United States.

In the other camp, the campaign has seen the meteoric rise of the ex-mayor of Bogotá and Green Party candidate, Antanas Mockus. The somewhat eccentric part-Maths professor, part-philosopher, who promises a focus on legality, is seen as many voters and commentators as the choice for change. There are undoubtedly some significant differences. Firstly, Mockus, unlike Santos and the current President, does not face repeated accusations of close relationships with paramilitary groups.

Their attitudes to the justice system, perhaps not unconnected, also seems to distinguish them. After the Supreme Court recently condemned the ex-Coronel Alfonso Plazas Vega to 30 years behind bars for his role in the disappearence of 11 people in the infamous storming of the Palace of Justice in 1985, the two candidates reacted in very different ways. Whilst Santos criticised the decision and questioned the viability of civil authorities investigating military personnel, Mockus gave his full backing to the decision and defended the role played by the judicial branch. In a country where impunity for state crimes is alarmingly high, this is no moot point.

However, the truth is that Mockus has compromised himself to continue with much of Uribe’s programme; significantly in his security and economic policies. Perhaps most notable is his unequivocal commitment to the much criticised Democratic Security policy – a policy that has led to the militarisation of the country and an intense harrasment of civil, community, and human rights organizations. He also maintains a similar dedication to foreign investment which, when centred around projects such as the cultivation of African Palm or the excavation of natural resources, has often led to massive displacement in the countryside and has offered few benefits to the small-scale Colombian farmer. Indeed, on the question of unequal land distribution, widely accepted as a root cause of the Colombian conflict, very little has been offered. The more reactionary forces in Mockus’ Green Party have recently blocked a possible deal with the leftist coalition, the Democratic Pole, which may have forced the land issue onto the agenda.

Whilst Mockus may not inspire the confidence to suggest that his presidency will change the social conditions needed to impact significantly the state of the Colombian conflict, his candidacy has inspired a huge amount of support. Many have seen him as an opportunity for change after two successive Uribe governments. However, if the results of the first round and the recent success of the Santos campaign to gain the backing of the other conservative parties are anything to go by, it appears unlikely that the result will render any change at all.

Hasan Dodwell, Colombia Local Correspondent. 14 June 2010

Related posts:

1. Colombia: an analysis of the new ‘Victims Law’ In August 2010, Juan Manuel Santos was elected as the...
2. Colombia Colombia has experienced an intense intrastate conflict for over half...
3. Colombia: A new chance for peace? At the beginning of November FARC leader Alfonso Cano was...

A Historical Strategy of Disrespect

These types of unfounded accusations are nothing new – nor is their use an isolated practice. Already in the late 1980s and early 1990s, lists of trade unionists, lawyers, and human rights defenders were being made public with accusations of subversion and complicity with the guerilla. These lists would appear in various channels of communication, sometimes signed by death squads, and on other occasions signed by the state security services themselves. (Hernando Calvo Ospina: Colombia, laboratorio de embrujo) Even more cynical was the fact that in the same period the Army, in the face of numerous denouncements, began to open human rights offices in all of its bases in an attempt to clean-up its image at the same time as assuming a role that essentially belongs to civil society. It is doubtful that individuals selected from the Army to be responsible for human rights would be the most suitable to judge violations committed by that very same military institution. This is even more doubtful reading a confidential report from 1995: ‘…the subversion, directly or indirectly, has a correlation with NGOs, especially those from the domestic left, that, supported by foreign money and in manifest agreement with leftist groups, have launched an offensive against the state and the Armed Forces, grouping them as systematic human rights violators’. (“Asunto, apreciación Coyuntural Nacional”. Teniente Coronel José Domingo García García, Jefe de Estado Mayor de la Quinta Brigada, 2 de Marzo de 1995)

General Herminio Sanchez Vargas, in his thesis from the Inter-American Defence College (formerly known as The School of the Americas) goes even further. He links human rights organisation with the attainment of capital ‘from kidnapping, drug-trafficking and assaults’, affirming that ‘at the international level the activity of the narcoguerrilla is concentrated on using NGOs to denounce human rights violations committed by the Armed Forces’, and that, ‘to achieve their objectives they use conviction and words…aspects more dangerous than arms and armies’. (“Las ONG de derechos humanos en Colombia”. Ejército de Colombia, Monografía, Colegio Intramericano de Defensa. Washington (Abril 1997))

Such attitudes can be seen to form part of the Doctrine of National Security, a strategy which the United States has imposed throughout Latin America since the beginning of the Cold War. The policy dictates a strict control over social conflicts in countries that are deemed to exist in the US “zone of influence”, silencing and marking as an internal enemy any movement that challenges the interests of US expansionism. In Colombia the Doctrine has taken various forms, most recently with the policy of Democratic Security. In this programme, championed by President Álvaro Uribe, this characterisation of human rights organisations as part of the internal enemy has been re-assumed with force: it has become part of his political programme, worsening further the repressive strategy focused against them.

Uribe’s Strategy of Stigmatisation

The delegitimisation of human rights defenders in Colombia is now a well established political strategy. A political strategy that has been systematic throughout the Presidency of Alvaro Uribe. Since his first election in 2002, whether through baseless criminal proceedings or damaging public statements, Colombian officials have sought to discredit, disrupt, and stigmatise the work of both national and international human rights organisations. Working in an environment which, by its very nature, entails a huge amount of risk, this stigmatisation, from the very institution that should be offering protection, enhances considerably the dangers encountered. If it were not for its systematic nature, the practice could be called reckless. The fact is, however, there is nothing at all reckless about its deployment: it is a political strategy aimed at silencing potential critics.

The stigmatisation of human rights workers often centres around baseless accusations of direct or indirect guerilla collusion. As well as generally creating a more dangerous environment, such statements often lead to direct reprisals for those stigmatised. In spite of this worrying reality, and numerous condemnations, both national and international, the strategy has continued unabated.

In the very first years of the Uribe Presidency, the presence of such a strategy could already be seen. In September 2003, the President declared various Human Rights organisations “politicians at the service of terrorism,” accusing them of using the “banner of human rights in order to undo the work of the Public Forces and Colombian society in making areas safe from terrorism.” As a result of the accusation, several human rights organisations filed a tutela (a legal proceeding against the state) with the Constitutional Court. Despite the Court’s ruling, T-1191, reiterating the state’s responsibilities, in 2004 accusations continued.

In their annual reports of both 2003 and 2004 such accusations were condemned by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The 2004 report comments: ‘…some public declarations from high ranking government officials that display indiscriminate questioning of the work of human rights defenders and their organisations contribute to the polarisation and increase the factors of risk faced by these defenders…’.

The increased risk to which the report refers has indeed been experienced by various victims of these public stigmatisations. In February 2007, two days after President Uribe accused opposition politicians of being “terrorists camouflaged as civilians,” 70 leading Colombian NGO’s and human rights defenders received threats sent by email from a paramilitary group calling themselves the New Generation Black Eagles. As Human Rights First, a US based organisation, reported at the time, the paramilitaries’ email repeated the same accusation, using the same language, as Uribe’s statement forty-eight hours earlier. The link between paramilitary threat and Uribe comment is palpable.

It is not however only the President whose baseless accusations stigmatise and bring increased risk to human rights defenders. There are numerous government officials who can play that role. In February 2008, in the lead up to a demonstration organised by the Colombian organisation Movement for the Victims of State Crimes (MOVICE), the Presidential Advisor, José Obdulio Gaviria, made various unfounded allegations against those involved in the movement. In a national radio interview, the government official, who is a first cousin of Pablo Escobar, accused the march of being “organised by FARC.” Following his comments, those involved in the demonstration received a flood of paramilitary threats and attacks – predominantly from the self-named Black Eagles. By mid-April, five people involved in the march had been murdered. A series of international institutions, including the United Nations, the European Union, and sixty-three US Congressmen, condemned the comments and resultant attacks.

International Attention

Indeed it was Colombia’s poor human rights record that eventually led to the rejection of the US-Colombia Free Trade Agreement in the chamber of the US Congress in April 2008. From this moment, with the Uribe government intent on pushing through the Free Trade Agreement, Colombian officials began to focus their attention on criticising and stigmatising human rights defenders condemning violations internationally. In May, at the opening of a transport terminal in Montería, Córdoba, Uribe accused the MOVICE leader, Ivan Cepeda, of merely using his role in the organisation to further his political aims. “There are people in Colombia like Doctor Iván Cepeda. They use the protection of victims to cover themselves….The protection of victims serve them in order to go to foreign countries and discredit the Colombian Government and Colombian institutions.”

In February 2009 in a specific attempt to discredit the international influence of the recently formed and outspoken group of politicians and intellectuals, Colombians for Peace, the President once more sought to stigmatise the general work of human rights defenders accusing them of being a direct arm of the guerrilla: “FARC’s intellectual bloc, what it does is speak out in Europe and in the United States, saying: ‘Watch out, Uribe is a paramilitary, do not approve the free trade agreement with Colombia, Uribe is a paramilitary and violates human rights’. FARC’s intellectual bloc collide with the truth because this is the government that has brought back confidence to Colombia.”

The paradox of this strategy, aimed at silencing or discrediting opposition whilst improving the image of Colombia in foreign countries, is that the very adoption of the strategy implicates the Uribe Government in both a deliberate disrespect for legitimate human rights organisations and the direct involvement in increasing paramilitary abuses. On 2 March 2009, after Uribe accused a delegation to the US Committee on Labour and Education of being motivated by “political hatred,” one of its members, Lina Malagón, a lawyer from the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), received a fax from the Capital Bloc of the Black Eagles which declared her a “military target”. As with many of the baseless accusations made by the Uribe Government, the Malagón case was condemned by a series of international human rights organisations.

Although the stigmatisations continue to receive condemnation from both inside and outside Colombia, the strategy has been unrelenting. Its continuation does not only ignore the demands of international organisations, it convenes Colombian norms: there are both UN agreements and Presidential Directives prohibiting such statements. From any government official, let alone the President himself. (For international agreements see A/Res/53/144, UN General Assembly Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1998) and precedents. For Presidential Directives see Directiva Presidencial 07 de 1999, Directiva Presidencial 07 de 2001 and also Directiva 09 de 2003.)

It is not just Colombian human rights organisations that have been victim to this strategy of stigmatisation. On numerous occasions the President has made explosive statements questioning the legitimacy and partiality of the work of respected international human rights organisations. In the final months of 2008, both Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, two widely recognised organisations, released a joint statement condemning both general and specific accusations made by Uribe against the organisations. The President had accused the Director of Human Rights Watch, Jose Miguel Vivanco, of being both an “accomplice” and a “supporter” of the FARC. As Vivanco responded in the press release: ‘These ridiculous accusations are symptomatic of an administration that refuses to be held accountable for what it does. Instead of taking the country’s human rights problems seriously, the Uribe government has sought to deflect criticism by simply accusing the critics – no matter who they are – of links to guerrillas’. Indeed, after the recent 2010 release of a Human Rights Watch report, titled Paramilitaries’ Heirs: The New Face of Violence in Colombia, the Minister of Defence, Gabriel Silva, discarded the report as motivated by “political orientation and ideology….”

In September 2009 a national and international campaign was launched calling for a fundamental change in the Government’s approach to human rights defenders. Carrying the title Colombia: Human Rights Defenders Under Threat, the campaign has brought together over 270 human rights organisations from across the globe.

The right to defend human rights in Colombia is still very far from being achieved. Dating back to before the period of the current President Alvaro Uribe, and assuming an even greater intensity during his reign, there has been a deliberate and planned process of de-legitimisation, stigmatisation, and harassment of human rights defenders. Whilst this strategy has overtly sought to weaken the impact of their work, it has only highlighted further the total disregard for human rights defenders from the Colombian Government. Such is the nature of the battle for human rights, as oppressive forces seek to silence and suppress, the struggle for those very rights grows stronger. Indeed in the case of Colombia this is proving true.

By Hasan Dodwell and Jaume Fortuño, May 2010

Photos are from the 2008 protest mentioned in the article, and are published courtesy of the International Peace Observatory.

Related posts:

1. The Stigmatisation of Human Rights Defenders in Colombia For President Uribe Velez, human rights defenders are “politically interested...
2. Colombia: an analysis of the new ‘Victims Law’ In August 2010, Juan Manuel Santos was elected as the...
3. The Importance of IDP Organisations in Colombia In a country with more than 4 million IDPs and...