Please Note that we have extended the deadlineto 5pm on Wednesday 6 October 2021
The ABColombia is a project of a coalition of five leading development agencies, CAFOD, Christian Aid UKI, Oxfam GB, SCIAF and Trócaire which engages decision-makers in the UK and Irish governments, the European Union and United Nations to advance the protection of the civilian population in Colombia, support the voice of civil society, obtain lasting solutions to the humanitarian crisis, and promote peace in Colombia’s ongoing armed conflict.
We are looking to recruit a dynamic Communication and Information Officer who is highly motivated with a passion for working on human rights issues, to be part of the ABColombia team and provide support to the Programme and Advocacy Manager (PAM).
Location: Southwark (10 minutes from Waterloo Station and 5 minutes from Lambeth North) see http://g.co/maps/cga98
Salary: Support B point S6: £30,309 pro rata including London Weighting.
Contract: 3 days a week (21 hours) part-time two years fixed term with the possibility of an extension.
The Information and Communications Officer will have responsibility within the ABColombia Team for development of a social media strategy and increasing our media presence, as well as, developing and maintaining the ABColombia website, managing the production of ABColombia reports, collaborating as part of the team on advocacy campaigns, human rights defender tours and working with partners in Colombia. The role will provide assistance to the Programme and Advocacy Manager in maintaining an up-to-date analysis of the conflict and peace building in Colombia, and implications for civil society, democracy, human and land rights.
If you wish to apply for this post please download the Job Description and Application Form below
Applicants must have permission to work in the UK.
Closing date for applications: 5pm Wednesday 6 October 2021
Interviews: in w/c 11 October 2021
For this post you are required to be fluent in Spanish andEnglish
The following press statement was issued by the UN Security Council after receiving a briefing by Carlos Ruiz Massieu, SRSG and Head of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia to the UN Security Council Meeting on 13 July 2021.
Press Statement New York, 16 July 2021. The Members of the Security Council reiterated their full and unanimous support for the peace process in Colombia and reaffirmed their commitment to working closely with Colombia to support comprehensive implementation of the Final Peace Agreement. They welcomed both parties’ continued commitment to this end, in the face of formidable challenges. They strongly supported complementary efforts by the United Nations Verification Mission, working in coordination with the UN Country Team, and noted its expanded mandate under resolution 2574 (2021) to verify compliance with sentences to be issued by the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP).
The Members of the Security Council reaffirmed their full support for the three components of the Comprehensive System for Truth, Justice, Reparation, and Non-Repetition, and stressed the need to fully respect their independence and autonomy. They welcomed the significant recent progress in fulfilment of each of their critical mandates, as outlined by the Secretary-General in his latest report, including the response by former members of the FARC-EP to their indictment for hostage-taking by the SJP. Noting that this constitutes a key phase for the peace process, they encouraged all parties to fulfil their responsibilities to the victims of the conflict by contributing fully to the truth.
The Members of the Security Council reiterated their concern regarding the persistent threats, attacks and killings targeting community and social leaders, including women leaders and those from indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities, as well as former FARC-EP members who laid down their arms as participants in the peace process. They took note of the briefing by a youth leader from Pasto, and in this regard underlined the importance of Colombia’s youth as protagonists of peace and welcomed commitments to involve youth in decision-making. They emphasised the need for further progress in implementing the action plan of the “Comprehensive Programme for Safeguards for Women Leaders and Human Rights Defenders”, and the importance of enhancing education and employment opportunities for women and youth. They encouraged the parties to work closely together on the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Security and Protection for former combatants, and looked forward to the swift implementation of the public policy to dismantle illegal armed groups.
The Members of the Security Council commended the results attained thus far in the reintegration process and encouraged efforts to enhance them, including through increased institutional attention to former combatants residing outside the former Territorial Areas for Training and Reintegration (TATRs).
The Members of the Security Council regretted the recent violence witnessed in the context of nationwide protests and expressed their condolences for the loss of life. They echoed appeals for non-violence, respect for human rights and the resolution of differences through peaceful and inclusive dialogue. They welcomed the Government’s commitment to conduct transparent investigations into reports of disproportionate use of force and hold those responsible to account.
The Members of the Security Council welcomed continued efforts by the Colombian Government to promote inclusive development as an important element of stable and lasting peace. They reiterated the importance of implementing all aspects of the Final Peace Agreement, including rural reform, inclusive political participation, the ethnic perspectives, the gender provisions, and countering illicit drugs including through crop substitution programmes. They encouraged all actors to accelerate efforts and consolidate progress towards its comprehensive implementation ahead of the fifth anniversary of its signing in November 2021.
On 26 January 2021, the Reconnaissance Chamber of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) charged eight members of the former Secretariat of the extinct FARC-EP with crimes against humanity and war crimes in case 01: Rodrigo Londoño Echeverry, Pablo Catatumbo Victoria, Pastor Lisandro Alape Lascarro, Milton de Jesús Toncel, Juan Ermilo Cabrera, Jaime Alberto Parra, Julián Gallo Cubillos and Rodrigo Granda Escobar. Individual responsibility varies according to the command positions assumed during the armed conflict, other middle level commanders are likely to be added to the case at a later date.
Depriving people of their freedom, and conditioning their release, as well as their well-being, integrity and life, is a war crime – specifically that of hostage-taking. As a result of this crime, the Reconnaissance Chamber also charged the former members of the Secretariat with other war crimes related to the treatment of hostages, such as homicide, torture, cruel treatment, attacks on personal dignity, sexual violence and forced displacement.
Listen to one of the stories of hostage taking during the conflict.
The Colombian Commission of Jurists with the financial support of UNDP createdthis podcast. The podcast tells the story of 11 policemen who endured more than 15 hours of combat in the Cucutilla station, Norte de Santander. The Station was attacked by over 300 men from the extinct FARC-EP. As a result of this violent act, two policemen died, one was injured and eight were detained; the latter were in the hands of this armed group for approximately a year and a half. The treatment they received was cruel and degrading, as they were subjected to threats, insults and humiliation. On 21 January 2001, the Army launched a rescue attempt, which left policemen Jhon Jairo Posse Zamudio and Alexis Enrique Vera Fajardo dead and Mr. Víctor Julio Sierra disappeared. To this day, his family continues to search for him.
This Podcast is one of a series of podcast entitled “Más allá del cautiverio: retratos sonoros del secuestro en Colombia’ (Beyond captivity: sound portraits of kidnapping in Colombia).
Statement by US Ambassador Jeffrey DeLaurentis at the UN Security Council (13 July 2021)
Over the past few months, the transitional justice system in Colombia has taken enormous strides, particularly with the acknowledgement in April by former FARC commanders of a policy within the group of kidnapping, and their acknowledgment of responsibility for crimes against humanity and war crimes. This is a vital step for truth, justice, and reconciliation, as well as for the satisfaction of victims’ rights. It is also an important demonstration of the commitment of former FARC members to the Final Agreement. We also recognize the transitional justice system’s progress on identifying and holding accountable members of state security forces who ordered or participated in human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings.
The JEP has taken an innovative and important approach to gender and race by taking a cross cutting approach in all of its cases. However, in the case of sexual and gender based violence and reproductive and LGBTI violence it is essential to also open a National Case. Only in this way will the patterns of violence, the suffering of victims and the extent of what happened in relation to these War Crimes be revealed.
Rape is one of the only crimes for which a community’s response is more often to stigmatise the victim rather than prosecute the perpetrator.
Repetition
Conflict-related sexual violence needs to be understood in its social and cultural context. In addition to patriarchal systems based on domination and gender discrimination, are other risk factors, such as social, political and economic marginalisation.These structural roots create a permissive context for the use of violence. Impunity for these crimes acts to reinforce, rather than challenge, these pre-existing norms and patterns of discrimination against women and LGBTI persons, both inside and outside of the conflict. What happened to women and LGBTI persons in the conflict in terms of sexual and gender based violence must be challenged. Only the truth when it is revealed will have the capacity to challenge attitudes that permit these violations and will create the possibility of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Non-Repetition envisaged in the final peace agreement.
In addition to factors impacting on all women, indigenous and afro-Colombian women have to deal with a history of slavery and years of condoned violence against them. This is coupled with racist perceptions that include a series of stereotypes about women’s bodies. This has resulted in even higher rates of violence against afro-Colombian and indigenous women. Multi-faceted oppression combined with the conflict further complicated this precarious situation.
Along with conflict generating unprecedented levels of sexual violence is a lack of state presence, particularly in the rural areas, and forced displacement, which not only lead to high indices of poverty, but also threaten cultural survival. In 2011 the Constitutional Court declared 34 Indigenous Communities at risk of physical or cultural extinction. According to the National Indigenous Organisation (ONIC), the multiple forms of violence used against indigenous women have produced, spiritual and cultural suffering both for the individual and the community.
Violence against women and LGBTI persons was exacerbated by the conflict. We have seen state agents repeating this crime by using sexual and gender based violence and assault against protesters over the last three years. In 2021 alone during the protests that started on 28 April according to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights(IACHR) report written following a visit to Colombia in June 2021 the Colombian Ombudsman has registered 113 actions of gender based violence during the social protests. 112 of these were allegedly committed by the Police and the Riot Police (ESMAD), 99 of these violations were against women and 13 against LGBTI persons. These included 27 cases of sexual violence, five cases of violent carnal access, and 22 cases of sexual assault. One of the cases was gender based violence against a women police officer. These cases only further highlight the importance of a National Case.
Colombia is a country where there is a persistent panorama of historical impunity for these crimes. Peace for women and LGBTI persons requires a transformation of these attitudes that underlie the violence directed at them both inside and outside of conflict.
International Norms and the Peace Accord
The Colombian Peace Accord drew on international norms in insisting that there are no amnesties for conflict sexual violence in Colombia. Resolutions such as UN Security Council Resolution 1960 (2000) suggests mechanisms to ensure reporting and punishment of conflict-related sexual violence, with the aim of preventing crimes by making sexual violence a liability for armed groups.[1]
The G8 declaration on preventing sexual violence in conflict, promoted by the UK during its presidency of the G8 in 2013 [ii] which draws on UN Resolutions 1325, as well as international law instruments in Resolutions 1820 and 1261 on women, peace and security, and 1612 on children in armed conflict. The declaration reiterates that no amnesties should be given for crimes of sexual violence in conflict.It stresses the importance of ending impunity for perpetrators of rape and other forms of sexual violence in armed conflict.
EU documents stress there should be no amnesties for conflict-related sexual violence, ‘the EU… will fight vigorously against impunity for serious crimes of concern… including sexual violence committed in connection with armed conflict…’,[iii] recognising that ‘in conflict and post-conflict situations it is crucial… to raise the issue of gender-based violence, including sexual violence, impunity and the enforcement of judicial measures against perpetrators of such atrocities’.[iv]
There is agreement across the various international instruments, as well as documents agreed nationally, that sexual violence in conflict is not a crime that should be granted amnesty. This crime has no justification in any conflict or domestic situation. If left unpunished, conflict-related sexual violence has repercussions for truth, justice, reparation and non-repetition, as well as for gender equality in the reconstruction process. If subject to amnesties sexual violence will become further entrenched in a post-conflict society.
This break through for women and men is extremely important for Colombia if real and transformative peace for women and LGBQTI persons is to take root in Colombia. It is also important for peace processes around the world as the JEP will set the bar internationally for this War Crime.
In National Case 03 there are six different areas of priority where ordinary citizens were killed and forcibly disappeared by state agents and subsequently presented as casualties in combat. They are the Caribbean Coast, Catatumbo, Antioquia, Huila, Casanare y Meta
First Priority Area – the Caribbean Coast
Colombia’s war crimes tribunal, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) charged 13 members of the Batallón de Artillería No.2 La Popa (La Popa Colombian Artillery Battalion) with their decisive participation in the killing of 127 ordinary citizens in the north of Cesar and the south of La Guajira, between 9 January 2002 and 9 July 2005 and forced disappearance many other people. Also charged were the two former Coronels of this Battalion, Publio Hernan Mejia Gutierrez – who was named “Best Soldier of the Americas” twice – and his successor at the La Popa Battalion Juan Carlos Figueroa. The Wiwa and Kankuamo indigenous peoples, especially, were victims of serious, differentiated and disproportionate damage from some members of this military unit.
The JEP determined that each of the accused had an essential role in shaping the criminal patterns and participated in particularly serious and representative conduct, without which the crime would not have been developed and have perpetuated this criminal plan. The Reconnaissance Chamber charged them with the crimes of homicide of a protected person and forced disappearance, as well as, the crimes against humanity of killings and forced disappearance of persons, and the war crime of homicide. The Chamber determined that there was a generalized and systematic attack against the civilian population in relation to these events.
The JEP determined that the 15 defendants were part of a criminal organization that was formed within the military unit and through which, and on a large scale, their fictitious operational results presented as “casualties in combat” people killed in a defenseless state by members of the Army or paramilitaries. They acted, moreover, in the full knowledge of their illegality covering up their acts to make them look legal. The evidence reveals collaboration between the Army Unit La Popa and the AUC right-wing paramilitaries.
Thejudicial verification allowed the Chamber to determinethat the murders carried out by the 15 accused had occurred within a criminal plan, articulated by common objectives, resources, roles and modes of operation aimed at territorial consolidation and to show progress in the war in against the guerrillas.
Both Mejia and Figueroa had been serving prison sentences, they were both released following the signing of the Peace Accord, because they had agreed to submit to the JEP and to tell the whole truth about what had happened during the conflict. However, Mejia has declared that he knew nothing of the extrajudicial killings until informed of them by the JEP.
The investigation into Mejia’s activities by the JEP has resulted in alleged death threats against witnesses. They agreed to testify despite Mejia being feared war criminal. Two previous witnesses were assassinated before they could testify, Fredys Oñate and Jose Trinidad, they had information of ties between Mejia and “Jorge 40,” an infamous paramilitary commander.
Figueroa Suarez as commander of the La Popa Battalion between 2004 and 2005 was part of a criminal network with alliances with paramilitaries to present civilians as guerrillas killed in combat. The Truth Recognition Chamber in October and November 2019 called Figueroa Suarez to testify voluntarily, he failed to attend on either occasion. It was discovered that in 2019 went to France and there is no evidence of him returning.
VIDEO in Spanish of the presentation in the Examination Chamber of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, which established an alliance between the Colombian Military in the La Popa battalion and the Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC) right-wing paramilitaries in order to erroneously present casualties from combats. Their victims were ordinary citizens taken and presented as combat killings. The JEP documented that the acts were perpetrated by members of the La Popa battalion and that those responsible, in some cases, maintained contact with the paramilitaries.
VIDEO: The Reconnaissance Chamber charged 15 members of the National Army, including Colonels Hernán Mejía and Juan Carlos Figueroa, with war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The victims accredited before the JEP who participate in case 03, known as the false positives case, will be able to present directly before the Recognition Chamber any observations they may have on the 104 versions of members and former members of the Sixteenth Brigade of the National Army, State agents who are not members of the Public Force and civilian third parties in the Casanare sub-case, one of the six territories prioritized in the first phase of the investigation.
During the observations hearing, which will take place on July 16 and 17, the JEP’s magistrate will receive the victims’ truth claims. The proceedings will be held in Yopal (Casanare), under the semi-presential modality, and will offer the possibility for the participants to follow the proceedings virtually from anywhere in the country.
Through this proceeding, the Examination Room will document key elements for the contrasting work it is currently carrying out. As pointed out by the Appeals Section of the SJP, the memory of the victims is fundamental to accurately determine the time, place, perpetrators and circumstances in which the violations were perpetrated, to clarify the motivations of the perpetrators, the context or plan in which the attacks took place, and the effects they caused immediately and over the years.
Audios of the version of Colombian Army General Paulino Coronado before the Recognition Chamber of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, in the investigation into false positives. Coronado is the first general charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity, due to extrajudicial executions in the area of Catatumbo, Norte de Santander. Paulino Coronado commanded the 30th Army Brigade in Norte de Santander from 27 November 2006 to 29 November 2008. He will have to answer before the JEP for 55 cases of false positives committed under his command between December 2007 and August 2008 and for 24 forced disappearances, but in his two versions before the JEP he assured them that he was only made aware of the extrajudicial executions when he was called before the JEP.
On 12 July 2021, a Colombia human rights question was asked by Lord Browne of Ladyton in the House of Lords, sparking off a debate. You can listen to the debate here.
Lord Brown asked Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made as to whether the reported killings of civilian protestors in Colombia has put the government of that country in breach of its commitments to respect human rights and democratic principles, as set out in the UK–Andean Countries Trade Agreement of 15 May 2019.
Lord Ahmad (for the Government of the UK responded): My Lords, the United Kingdom remains concerned about reports of human rights violations in Colombia and we have raised our concerns with the relevant state actors since the protests began. We welcome the Colombian Government’s commitment to transparent investigations into allegations of excessive force and to take appropriate action against those responsible. The British Government attach real importance to the principles underpinning the UK-Andean Countries Trade Agreement and expect our partners to do the same.
Lord Browne: I thank the Minister for his reply. The UK’s 2019 continuity trade agreement with Colombia commits the UK Government to respect human rights and democratic principles. The violence towards and killings of civilian protesters committed by the Colombian security forces were not only totally unacceptable but in violation of that trade agreement. On 17 January, the Foreign Secretary told “The Andrew Marr Show” that
“we shouldn’t be engaged in free-trade negotiations with countries abusing human rights”.
What, if anything, will the Government do to hold the Colombian Government to their trade agreement commitments, if their investigations show what is obvious to everyone?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord that it is important that we hold countries to their human rights commitments. The actual trade agreement is, of course, yet to be ratified by Colombia. Nevertheless, through the direct engagement of both our embassy and my colleague, Minister Morton, who is responsible for our relations with Colombia, we have spoken directly with the Colombian authorities, which are now pursuing a full range of investigations into alleged misconduct by the police. We welcome those steps that are being taken to strengthen justice and accountability.
Baroness Sanderson of Welton (Con) My Lords, it is not just the reported killings that are cause for such concern but the return of another familiar tactic from Colombia’s long civil conflict: disappearances. Human rights groups say that they have recorded up to 700 cases in recent months. What representations have the UK Government made to the Colombian authorities about this aspect of the protests?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I agree with the noble Baroness that it is important to focus specifically on the concerns that she has highlighted. We have made representations through ministerial engagement and regularly do so through our embassy on the ground. We continue to support transitional justice within Colombia as a key part of our work.
Baroness Coussins (CB) My Lords, does the Minister agree that the FTA was breached when the Colombian police targeted clearly identified journalists and human rights defenders in the recent protests, seriously injuring many of them in an attempt to prevent them from reporting? What, if any, specific representations has the UK made to the Colombian Government about this, especially as we recently co-hosted the Global Conference for Media Freedom?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)Lords, the noble Baroness is correct. We have prioritised media freedom in our work globally and I can assure her that we have raised a broad range of human rights abuses and concerns arising particularly from the recent protests. In this regard, we welcome the concerted attempt to look into investigations and hold to account those who have committed these crimes.
Baroness Goudie (Lab) My Lords, it is concerning to learn that 83 people recently suffered gender-based violence during a social protest in Colombia. One young woman who was arbitrarily detained was only 17 and was allegedly raped by the police. She committed suicide as a result. As the UK has taken the global lead on prevention of conflict related to sexual violence, what representation is it making to the Colombian Government on the alleged sexual assault?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I will certainly follow up on the noble Baroness’s specific case and ensure that an appropriate representation is made in my capacity as the Prime Minister’s special representative on preventing sexual violence, particularly in conflict—that means building post conflict, as well. This is a key priority for our Government
Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)My Lords, on a number of occasions, most recently in May, I have raised with the Minister the question of Britain’s training programme with the Colombian police. We have heard from the reports of the demonstrations about violence committed by the police, involving between 26 and 44 deaths and, as my noble friend said, sexual assault. Can the noble Lord explain exactly what measures we are taking to ensure that the Colombian security forces are held to account for their human rights abuses?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, the noble Lord is correct that he has raised this issue. We continue to ensure that our training of overseas law enforcement officers is fully supported by reviewing all training initiatives and ensuring that human rights are at the forefront of direct engagement. The 220 investigations that I have alluded to are specifically into misconduct by the police. These cases are now open and we are monitoring and following their progress.
Lord Berkeley of Knighton (CB) My Lords, anyone who has travelled in Colombia knows that it is both one of the most beautiful and one of the most violent places on earth. Agencies such as Human Rights Watch have identified the lack of separation between the police and the military as contributing to the use of force and live ammunition to control protesters. Does the Minister agree that one way we might attempt to use any influence that we have would be to push for greater separation between these agencies?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord and will take that forward. I agree with the premise that we need to see a clear demarcation in the responsibilities of the police.
Baroness Blower (Lab) My Lords, I refer to my interests as recorded in the register. A recent ruling from the transitional justice court named 10 Colombian army officers as responsible for murdering 120 civilians and disappearing 24 in 2007-08. These cases relate to the so-called “false positives”: the Colombian state stands accused of killing close to 6,500 civilians, dressing them as guerrillas, during the Uribe presidency. Given the hostility to the transitional justice court from certain quarters in Colombia, can the Minister repeat Britain’s support for this institution and welcome the positive engagement of former FARC commanders, who have recognised their role in crimes during the armed conflict?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I am happy to confirm the Colombian Government’s long-standing commitment to assist former guerrilla fighters in their transition to civilian life following the peace agreement. We remain committed to this and since 2015 have given over £63 million of support directly to Colombia through the Conflict, Stability and Security Fund.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes (Con) Can the Minister comment on whether the Government joined in the condemnation by the United Nations of the violent repression by the police of protests in Colombia in May, which left at least 18 people dead and 87 missing? What other steps are being considered?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, I confirm to my noble friend that we have made representations through discussions at the United Nations. As I said, we continue to make representations through my colleague, Minister Morton, and our ambassador to Colombia.
Lord Bhatia (Non-Afl) My Lords, if reports of the killings are correct, should we not cancel the trade agreement?
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con) My Lords, as the noble Lord may recollect, the trade agreement has specific articles contained within it, Articles 1 and 8, which ensure that human rights are upheld. We will continue, because Colombia is yet to ratify the trade agreement, to uphold that aspect of it. Equally, as we lend support to Colombia, it is important that we ensure improved trade and prosperity for all Colombians.
On 13 July 2021 Carlos Ruiz Massieu, Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Head of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia, briefed ambassadors on latest developments in respect to the implementation of the Peace Accord.
This is a summary of the report that the Head of the UN Verification Mission in Colombia presented:
The peace process is entering “a critical juncture”
Ruiz referred to the achievements of the Transitional Justice System and the way in which it had ensured the ‘…participation of all, including the victims of conflict, …[which is] key to this progress’
Transitional Justice System is made up of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, the Truth Commission and the Search Unit for the Disappeared. The initial actions of these institutions, created to guarantee justice, truth, reparation and non-repetition, and which exists due to the ‘tenacity and generosity of the victims of the conflict’, must ensure that their rights are upheld.
Special Jurisdiction for Peace.
In April 2021, seven former high-level FARC-EP combatants officially accepted responsibility for crimes against humanity and war crimes of kidnappings during the conflict.
In July 2021, 10 army officers and a civilian were indicted with war crimes and crimes against humanity related to killings and forced disappearances presented as combat casualties also known as false positives (falsos positivos).
The Search Unit for Persons Deemed as Missing
The work of the Unit for the Search for Persons Deemed as Missing has made it possible to find hundreds of bodies of forcibly disappeared persons.
According to Ruiz, “it will take time to dismantle the narratives, it will take time to dismantle structures and identities inherited from the conflict, and thus help the Colombian people, and especially those who experienced firsthand the worst of the war, to definitively close the chapter of the conflict and continue on their path to reconciliation”.
Security, Protection and Participation
The UN envoy underscored the need for joint initiatives by the state and civil society to protect social leaders and human rights defenders in communities affected by recurring violence.
Expressed concern regarding violence and stigmatization against former combatants and members of Comunes party. Particularly as 2022 is an election year, and ‘when they expect to engage actively in political work across the country’.
“The persistence of violence and insecurity, highlight the urgent need for enhanced prevention and protection measures, as well as for additional and more solid steps to dismantle illegal organizations, to bring perpetrators to justice, as well to extend State institutions, public services and development opportunities as quickly as possible to conflict-affected communities”
Ruiz, identified that the agreements in the Peace Accord promote a widening of democratic spaces and guarantees for participation and the need to promote dialogue.
Peacebuilding
‘Despite a challenging reintegration landscape, former combatants continue to demonstrate their commitment to building a new life, participating actively in peacebuilding and development efforts alongside their communities’.
‘Previous reintegration experiences across the globe have proven the importance of linking this process to broader and complementary transformations. The Peace Accord links reintegration with comprehensive rural reform. The implementation of this chapter is ‘essential to the overall success of the [peace] process’.
Access to housing, land, productive projects and adequate support for their sustainability are essential for former combatants and the peace process.
“The recent approval of the 16 seats intended to promote the participation in Congress of historically excluded populations in conflict-affected regions, is an encouraging development.”
A decade ago this month, the United Nations Human Rights Council unanimously welcomed the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs).
The UNGPs set out an authoritative framework for state duties and business responsibilities towards fulfilling human rights. They highlight the essential role that access to remedy can play in providing justice to those affected by corporate abuses. They also set out the need for a “smart mix” of policies, including mandatory measures, to meet these aims.
The ten-year anniversary of the UNGPs serves as a milestone to reflect both on what has and what has not been achieved. This must include the over-emphasis placed by states and businesses alike on voluntary approaches to tackling business abuses of human rights in corporate groups and supply chains. To close this gap, the UK must introduce its own mandatory requirements for businesses to respect all human rights.
Systemic, persistent human rights abuses and environmentally destructive practices are commonplace in the global operations and supply chains of UK businesses. Marginalised groups such as women, indigenous peoples, children and migrant workers, among others, are disproportionately impacted and UK consumers become complicit in buying goods and services tainted by human rights abuses through no fault of their own.
It is high time that the UK implemented its own mandatory requirements for businesses to respect all human rights. The UK was the first country to develop a ‘Business and Human Rights National Action Plan’ based on the UNGPs and one of the first to pass a domestic supply chain law, in the form of S.54 of the Modern Slavery Act. However, it is now widely accepted the S.54 is not fit for purpose to prevent forced labour abuses and modern slavery
in supply chains – against the backdrop of the G7, led by the UK, explicitly committing to eradicate “the use of all forms of forced labour in global supply chains”. Our Coalition, which spans NGOs, trade unions and law firms, is calling on the UK government to urgently introduce a new UK law to hold companies to account when they fail to prevent human rights abuses and environmental harms. This law should mandate companies – across all sizes and sectors, including financial organisations – and the public sector to undertake ‘human rights and environmental due diligence’ across their supply chains. While accountability mechanisms for the public sector and private sector should be different, public procurement spending must align with the state duty to protect human rights in supply chains, shaping demand and driving business to respect rights.
A new UK law should be based on the world-leading ‘failure to prevent’ liability provisions of the 2010 Bribery Act – as already called for by Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights and confirmed as legally feasible by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law. Crucially, such a law would consolidate significant, recent advances in English common law, for example, in the Supreme Court cases Lungowe v Vedanta and Okpabi v Shell.
While welcome, the Government’s deforestation due diligence mechanism in the Environment Bill notably fails to comprehensively include human rights. Specific recommendations from the UK Government-convened Global Resource Initiative taskforce call for combined human rights and environmental due diligence, but this combined due diligence approach is notably absent from the Bill.
A new law would also ensure the UK is in step with other countries introducing new corporate accountability laws incorporating mandatory due diligence. As the EU moves forward with its proposal to place new due diligence obligations on all companies operating in the Single Market, the absence of strong UK domestic legislation means that the UK will immediately fall behind the EU on human rights and environmental protections. This will create a confusing patchwork of regulations and an uncertain landscape for businesses. Companies in the UK which are operating in the Single Market would be obliged to follow mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence laws, while those outside it would not.
A new UK law is vital to ensure the delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals, it will help reverse the devastating consequences of unchecked corporate impunity for human rights abuses and in doing so meet G7 commitments to ensure respect for human rights. It would align the UK to an emerging international consensus on these issues, help to deliver a meaningful ‘Global Britain’ vision and should be a central element of a package of measures required to achieve a global green transition and a just recovery from the COVID-19 crisis.
On 14 May 2021, Christian Aid and ABColombia hosted an event with the Transitional Justice Institute: Why Truth and Justice Matter in Colombia.
An overarching theme throughout the event was the pivotal role that the international community can play in supporting Colombia’s pathway to truth and justice, by making victims visible and supporting the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) to ensure accountability.
Please see a YouTube video recording of the event hyperlinked below, followed by a summary of some key points raised by our panel of experts.
Colombia’s peace process
implementation of the peace agreement, in its entirety, provides the best way of addressing many of the major challenges which Colombia faces today.” (Eamon Gilmore)
Eamon Gilmore underlined the importance of the Peace Accord not only in addressing the root causes of the conflict, but equally the current situation in Colombia. This is because the Accord “addressed the interlinked root causes of the conflict: inequality, stigmatisation, political participation, resources, land ownership and drug trafficking.”
As with the current protests, dialogue and concrete practical solutions are the only way to address such a serious and complex situation. The National Commission for Security Guarantees has to be utilised to its maximum potential to reach such solutions.” (Eamon Gilmore)
Pablo de Grieff warned of a certain ambivalence towards the comprehensive implementation of the peace process, shown for instance in the lack of progress on points one and two of the Accord – rural reform and political participation – on which further progress is essential.
Rural reform – in a country with shameful patterns of wealth distribution, including land – is not having an easier time than it did in the past. But this is a part of the Accord, [where] it is absolutely essential to make progress…
…The second point of the Accord on political participation, cannot be said to be the object of a more serious commitment either. Sadly, this would have been extraordinarily helpful in channeling, the perfectly justified, social discontent in recent weeks.” (Pablo de Grieff)
“Transitional justice can make important contributions, when it is implemented comprehensively as a coherent policy; transitional justice contributes to not only recognising people as victims, but also, and very importantly, as rights holders. Transitional justice contributes to promoting civic trust and particularly trust in State Institutions. More remotely, but similarly, transitional justice can make a contribution to strengthening the rule of law and contribute to processes of social integration.” (Pablo de Grieff)
Along with the sentiment of the panel, Pablo de Grieff underlined the importance of the international community being present “for the long haul” to support the long-term horizons of Colombia’s peace process, as well as making itself present with respect to accompanying various other processes on which successful and sustainable transitional justice depends.
…for example, [accompanying processes include] very difficult topics that were not discussed in the agreement, but that are absolutely critical for the future of the country, including security sector reform, the strengthening of oversight mechanisms and courts … the international community can provide both incentives and the forums to engage in [these] conversations” (Pablo de Grieff)
In light of the recent protests, and in order to address non-repetition, the JEP have also issued a statement stating that there should be a reform of the security services, and this is…where the international community and Ireland have experience that could be useful to Colombia, especially on issues to do with independent monitoring mechanisms.” (Louise Winstanley)
Pablo de Grieff also reminds the audience that there are structures that the Truth Commission has established outside of Bogotá, that receive less attention yet are just as important, and “have the potential for engaging positive regional conversations that need to be supported by the international community”.
As a Colombian, of course I am extremely grateful for the role that the international community has played, thus far, but it seems that we are in many ways just at the beginning, and some of the topics that are left are precisely the ones where the greatest assistance will be necessary.” (Pablo de Grieff)
Pablo de Grieff outlined the significant contribution that truth and justice has brought to Colombian society in terms of the visibility of victims in the conflict.
“There is no going back from that; victims have gained a place in the public sphere, that of course they deserve, and that the country needs in order to be able to say that it is involved in the establishment of a shared political process.” (Pablo de Grieff)
Victims and intersectional experiences of violence
María Adelaida Palacio Puerta, SISMA Mujer, highlighted the remaining obstacles in achieving justice for victims of sexual violence, such as institutional mechanisms and prevailing machoistic attiudes that violate the rights and bodies of women and leave women feeling guilty for their experience of violence. More broadly, while women’s movements were successful in achieving a gender perspective and a recognition of gender based violence against women in the context of the Colombian conflict, in the Peace Accord the 122 gender measures which they achieved within the Accord are not being fully implemented.
We are very concerned that the regime [Colombian Government] is not interested. We don’t know who is responsible for the response to sexual violence against against women – the authorities are not giving any serious response to this question…Women feel guilty if they’re victims of sexual violence…the experiences of women who seek to speak out and to seek justice makes it clear that they are marginalised and silenced by cultural attitudes.” (María Adelaida Palacio Puerta)
Specifically, Afro-descendant and indigenous women experience gender discrimination combined with historical attitudes linked to slavery and discrimination.
The Afro-Colombian women have been clear that the violence which they have been subjected to by armed groups is a continuation of a cycle of violence that they have been victims of…and that the role of the state has done absolutely nothing to counter these actions.” (María Adelaida Palacio Puerta)
In this context, Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction of Peace (JEP) must appoint a public prosecutor specialised in violence against women. María Adelaida Palacio Puerta and Louise Winstanley underlinedthe need for a macro case on conflict-related sexual violence at the national level, in order for the Truth Commission to help to identify patterns of violence and to reveal the truth about how armed actors used sexual violence.
…the Macro Case on violence against women should explicitly take note of the stories told by the women in order to ensure that its conclusions reflect the lived and historical realities of women…[recognising] the similarity between modern expressions and past expressions of violence against women.” (María Adelaida Palacio Puerta)
Alongside the principal demand of a woman occupying the role of a specialised public prosecutor in the JEP, María Adelaida Palacio Puerta underlined the importance for an adequate reparation model to be established for women who’ve been victims of sexual and gender based violence within the context of the conflict.
Business actors: accountability ?
Laura underlines the importance of civil society, who mobilised for accountability and advanced this issue into the design of the current mechanisms. However, there is an increased legal power from economic actors, speaking to the global process that Leigh Payne outlined of corporate actors vetoing accountability mechanisms.
“But there is increased veto power … negative to accountability efforts, [including] a business elite very close to high levels of government to facilitate these types of processes”. (Laura Bernal-Bermúdez)
Further challenges lie in that Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) can essentially only investigate cases of third parties who have voluntarily requested to be put on trial; according to an investigation by La Silla Vacia, only 2% out of those (657) third parties are business actors.
“…we only see business people coming to the JEP when investigations in the public prosecutor’s office in the ordinary jurisdiction are advancing. That’s the only incentive and so those actors that have historically eluded justice [remain] … we still have that gap in terms of accountability.” (Laura Bernal-Bermúdez)
However, Colombia’s Truth Commission is different from other countries in that it included discussions from the outset regarding how to involve actors from the business sector; the upcoming report will include this issue.
Crucially, the international community plays an important role in applying pressure by being aware of these processes, tracking them, and supporting the work of victims and their advocates. Laura Bernal-Bermúdez reports evidence in Colombia of cases where the participation of the international community – by INGOs, the Inter-American System of Human Rights, and even foreign governments – has assisted the challenging process of achieving convictions.
[International pressure is] “…key to support the efforts of victims, their advocates, and the institutional innovators in the courts and in the Truth Commission trying to advance these cases” Laura Bernal-Bermúdez
President Duque signed the International Treaty on the protection of the Environment- Escazú – in December 2019. This was in response to agreements that he had made with the social protesters in 2019. The Escazú Agreement although signed in 2019 was still waiting for ratification by Congress. It was presented last week, on 17 June 2021, for ratification. However, the Congressional session ended with a postponement of the vote. However, if this is not voted on before 20 June 2021, the project runs the risk of being shelved.
Escazú Agreement
The Escazú Agreement is a fundamental step forward in terms of protection of the environment and of environmental defenders. It emerged in response to the 2012 United Nations (UN) Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). Colombia has some of the most important bio-diverse regions of the world, places like the Amazon and the Chocó. It is also one of the most dangerous countries in the world for environmental human rights defenders. According to Global Forest Watch, Colombia is the sixth country in the world with the highest level of deforestation. For these reasons this is an exceptionally important International Treaty for Colombia to sign.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, stated: ‘the Escazú Agreement …’provides a cornerstone for environmental democracy, international cooperation and multilateralism and that must be at the centre of efforts to build back better using a human rights-based approach.’ She went on to emphasized that ‘the Escazú Agreement is the first of its kind in the world, since it not only protects human rights but also guarantees that all people have the right to a healthy environment, to participate, and to access information and justice in environmental matters’.
Colombia has suffered an incredible number of attacks and killings of environmental defenders, including indigenous, peasant farmer and Afro-Colombian community leaders. Escazú is a legal tool that can help to protect the activists and the environment.
Broadly speaking the Escazú Agreement protects four key rights:
access to information on environmental projects
public participation in environmental matters
effective justice to settle disputes between businesses and communities
protection of environmental leaders
Business unions and some political sectors have opposed its ratification by the Congress of the Republic, with arguments such as the loss of sovereignty, legal uncertainty or its supposedly negative effect on private investment.
The Escazú Agreement introduces a new approach to environmental issues, that of environmental democracy. Rather than seeing environmental issues as a cost and barrier to economic growth, this new perspective focuses on the consideration of human rights and citizen participation as necessary requirements to ensure a prosperous economy and guarantee the right to a healthy environment. In other words, it incorporated the well-being of the communities in terms of a dignified life. This approach also makes it a powerful instrument for conflict prevention.
Escazú also attributes to vulnerable groups special attention from the State. In a country like Colombia, characterised by wide socioeconomic gaps, deepened by the pandemic and by regressive government policies, favourable actions for excluded groups in relation to the benefits of the economic growth and state action are determining factors. It also constitutes a tool for the protection of environmental defenders.
Escazú also grants a new status to environmental criteria as benchmarks for decision-making in relation to Developmental Models, in an attempt to balance rather than subordinating them to the objectives of economic growth. In Colombia, the environmental sector lost political, institutional and financial weight in government priorities, when under former President Uribe mining and hydrocarbons became the locomotive of the country’s growth in the National Development Plans.
UN Special Rapporteur on Toxic Substances and Human Rights, Marcos Orellana states the Escazú Agreement provides citizens and communities with the tools needed to hold States accountable for protecting and fulfilling the fundamental right to a healthy environment.
Colombia and the Escazú Agreement.
President Iván Duque signed the Escazú Agreement in 2018, and he made ratification one of the commitments to the social protesters, during the dialogues to end the 2019 National Strike. For the Escazú to enter into force in Colombia it has to be ratified by Congress. The Government presented the initial bill with the signature of five ministries for urgent processing to Congress in July 2020. Senator Ernesto Macías, Uribista[1] and one of the closest Senators to the government, sent a letter to the Ministry of the Interior asking it to stop the ratification process for this treaty.
According to a former Environment Minister Manuel Rodríguez Becerra, the private sector had been very successful in blocking Escazú. Apparently, President Duque signing the Escazú Agreement had surprised the business community because they had regular meetings with him, but he had not mentioned this. Following the presentation of the Bill by the government the business lobby came out strongly against its passing into law.
Yet Internationally their is a recognition that treaties like Escazú are essential if we are to develop a sustainable recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, which highlights the need to promote environmental and human rights. ECLAC’s Executive Secretary Alicia Bárcena talking about recovery from COVID-19 said ‘we must seriously face the fact that there will be no development or economic recovery if we do not consider sustainability…Society has expressed itself loud and clear: we want a different future, a future that does not take us back to where we were before. We want growth to support equality and equality to support growth, and we want to do this with environmental sustainability and our societies’ participation.’ (highlights added by this author)
Despite the government submitting the Bill with a note for urgent processing it appears that since then it has done little to support its progress through the Congress. Processing of the Bill has been delegated to second-level officials from the Ministries of the Environment and Foreign Affairs.
According to a report by “La Silla Vacia” following the presentation of Escazu, they consulted seven congressmen in the Congressional Commissions responsible for processing the Bill, and they all told the reporter the same story, that they have not felt the usual strong lobby from the Government when it wants Congress to approve projects. In fact Congressmen from the Democratic Center Party – the government party -, Radical Change and the Conservative Party all signed a document asking Congress not to approve the Escazú Agreement.
Even the Ambassadors of Germany, Norway and Sweden sent a public letter to the President confirming their support for ratification of Escazú.
The passing into law of Escazu was one of the agreements made with the social protesters, the government’s failure to prioritise its ratification is therefore worrying and cannot give a positive message to the current protesters. But nor does it give a positive message globally. President Ivan Duque has said all the “right” things in relation to the environment. But the difficulty occurs in terms of implementation. Duque has prided himself on being an international environmental leader, for example he promised reforestation by planting 180 million trees, of which, not even a third have been planted.
Social protests are still active. Escazú must be voted on before 20 June 2021 as it must pass its first debate to survive. The Government could win a point with those protesting on the streets if it achieves ratification of the international treaty in its first debate. Failing to fulfill its promise from previous agreements with the social protesters (in 2019) would set a problematic precedent.
[1] Uribista is someone who supports the policies of former president Alvero Uribe Velez.
