The “War on Terror” and the Principle of Distinction in International Humanitarian La

Las nuevas amenazas a la seguridad que han surgido en los últimos años están poniendo seriamente en juego la importancia y la implementación del derecho internacional humanitario. Este artículo investiga el impacto de la guerra del terror en el principio de distinción en el derecho internacional humanitario. Examina, de forma específica, prácticas estatales, por ejemplo, de los Estados Unidos, que han cedido frente al surgimiento de nuevas reglas relativas al principio de distinción. Para esto, se hace un análisis de dicho principio bajo dos perspectivas: blancos concretos y captura

A comparative study of two Casas de la Cultura in Bogota: Tunjuelito and Usaquen

Es un estudio descriptivo/exploratorio de dos Casas de la Cultura en Bogotá (Tunjuelito/Usaquén), basado en la revisión de documentos y recolección de datos a través de herramientas cualitativas, con aspectos cuantitativos en la presentación de datos por medio de cuadros de comparación. Presenta resultados de las siguientes categorías: grupos de interés, aspectos administrativos y productos.

The project of land restitution in Colombia: an illustration of the civilizing force of hypocrisy?

This article offers a theoretical interpretation of the dispositions on land restitution contained in the famous “Victims’ Bill”, which was debated in the Colombian Congress during the year 2008. The bill included specific mechanisms aimed at guaranteeing the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict. At the time, the bill was endorsed by all the main political actors in the country –notably the government and the elites that support it, on the one hand, and victims’ and human rights organizations and other opposition groups, on the other–. The fact that the restitution of land to victims of the Colombian armed conflict was being considered as a serious possibility by all political actors in the country seemed to indicate the existence of a consensus among actors whose positions are ordinarily opposed, on an issue that has traditionally led to high levels of polarization. This consensus is quite puzzling, because it seems to be at odds with the interests and/or the conceptions of justice advocated by these political actors, and because the restitution of land faces enormous difficulties both from a factual and a normative point of view, which indicates that it may not necessarily be the best alternative for dealing with the issue of land distribution in Colombia. This article offers an interpretation of said consensus, arguing that it is only an apparent consensus in which the actors are actually misrepresenting their interests and conceptions of justice, while at the same time adopting divergent strategies of implementation aimed at fulfilling their true interests. Nevertheless, the article concludes that the common adherence by all actors to the principle of restorative justice might bring about its actual realization, and thus produce an outcome that, in spite (and perhaps even because) of being unintended, might substantively contribute to solving the problem of unequal land distribution in Colombia. Even though the article focuses in some detail on the specificities of the 2008 Bill, it attempts to make a general argument about the state of the discussion on how to deal with the issue of land distribution in the country. Consequently, it may still be relevant today, especially considering that a new Bill on land restitution is currently being discussed in Congress, which includes the same restitution goals as the Victims’ Bill and many of its procedural and substantive details, and which therefore seems to reflect a similar consensus to the one analyzed in the article.

Equilibrium Principle in Colombian Public Contracting

Public contracting in Colombia is conflicting and inefficient. It frequently leads to damage to State property. The Colombian legal system cannot assure efficient and transparent public contracting. The cause is the institutional environment characterized by high transaction costs. Colombian law worsens the process by recognizing the principle of economic equilibrium in public contracts. This principle increasese contract incompleteness and renders impossible the use of economic incentives to control the opportunism of the economic agents. The authors present the hypothesis that the economic equilibrium principle increases the conflictive nature of public contracting. They test the hypothesis empirically. The first section of the paper presents a summary of the literature on transaction costs economics, as well as the legal literature on the historical origin and the content of the economic equilibrium principle. The second section describes the methodology of the empirical study. The third section shows the empirical evidence of the effects that the economic equilibrium principle exerts over the public contracting. The last section presents the conclusions.

The voters of Colombia are free?

A fundamental principle of democracy is citizenship freedom. We suggest that a fair electoral contest is possible if a relationship between free will, electoral preferences and respect to the public institutions (constitutionalism) (section 1) exists. We focus on three illiberal practices that perturb the voter's decision: political clientelism and political markets (sections 2 to 4), media influence (which feeds on the voter's limited rationality and limited information) (section 5), and the suppression of opposition options (section 6). Later (section 8), we provide a brief balance and, additionally, we show how in Colombia the political system has missed opportunities to expand the voters' freedom. Our interpretation of the electoral process in Colombia is an appeal, supported on theoretical arguments and empirical evidence, to doubt about the voters' freedom. Also we make a call for more etudies.