In May 2026, The Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ) highlighted the importance of Special Jurisdiction for Peace’s (JEP) ruling in the Macro-Case 03, Caribbean Region sub-case, concerning extrajudicial executions. The ruling concluded that, between January 2002 and July 2005, the Popa Battalion killed and forcibly disappeared 135 people, who were then falsely presented as killed in combat. The full article, in Spanish, can be found here.
The JEP details in its ruling the practice commonly known as “false positives”, which involved civilians being killed by members of the security forces and subsequently falsely reported as enemy combatants, thereby legitimising the killings and covering up the crimes. The practice was discovered by CSOs working with communities and confirmed by the then United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur, Philip Alston. This practice was carried out systematically, as the army established directives that prioritised body counts, and created institutional incentives for officers to increase their body count rates. The ruling also highlights the role played by senior military officials in the planning, execution and cover-up of the crimes.
The JEP identifies a pattern of coordination between paramilitary groups and army officials in identifying victims, many of whom were stigmatised and falsely accused of being guerrilla members before being killed. This was a transactional relationship that mutually benefited them, in which the paramilitaries would provide the names of people to be killed in exchange for ease of transit and territorial control.
It also identifies a further pattern, in which the killings were committed against people in situation of extreme vulnerability, who were arbitrarily apprehended or deceived with false promises, to lure them to be killed. Many of whom where young men from poor regions who took up offers of work in another department in an effort to provide an income for them and their families, who were killed upon arrival. Mothers of these young men have campaigned tirelessly for justice despite the threats that they have received that have sought to silence them – these mothers are the Mothers of Soacha.
The ruling also places victims and the consequences of these crimes at the centre of the process, highlighting the profound and far-reaching impact on victims’ families and communities. The stigmatisation of dressing the victims in guerrilla uniforms and passing them off as guerrillas killed in combat meant that cases were not properly investigated, creating impunity, damaging families’ reputations, affecting their mental health, and fracturing entire communities. This impunity persisted for years, deepening the suffering through institutional silence, misinformation, and the refusal to recognise those killed as victims.
One of the fundamental aspects of Colombia’s transitional justice system is its emphasis on restorative sanctions, aimed at addressing the harms caused and responding to victims’ demands. In this case, the ruling included six restorative projects that were proposed and adjusted through a participatory process involving victims. These projects include the construction of spaces of memory and activities to dignify victims, the creation of dedicated spaces for psychosocial support and the strengthening of cultural identity, as well as initiatives for collective restoration. Those found responsible will be required to carry out restorative sanctions through the work, projects and activities identified within these restorative initiatives.
However, the real challenge lies in ensuring sufficient resources and effective coordination between state institutions to guarantee that these measures are fully implemented, so that according to Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ) “promises are translated into real transformation in the lives of victims and effective guarantees of non-repetition”.