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.

Las limitaciones que enfrentaría la instauración de una comisión de la verdad, en el proceso de tránsito hacia la paz entre el Estado y las Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC)

En este artículo se analizan las posibles limitaciones que enfrentaría la instauración de una comisión de la verdad, que garantice a las víctimas de violaciones graves a los derechos humanos e infracciones al derecho internacional humanitario, cometidas por el accionar paramilitar en Colombia, el acceso a los derechos de verdad, justicia y reparación avanzando hacia la implantación de un modelo de justicia transicional y justicia restaurativa.---This article analyzes potential limitations that would be faced by the establishment of a truth commission to guarantee the access to justice, truth, and repair to the victims of material breach to the Human Rights and infractions to the International Humanitarian Right, committed by paramilitary actions in Colombia, thus advancing towards the implementation of a transitional justice and restorative justice model.

Análisis de las sanciones del sistema de responsabilidad penal para adolescentes a la luz de la justicia restaurativa

La presente investigación diagnóstica busca analizar el papel de las sanciones implementadas por el Sistema de Responsabilidad Penal para Adolescentes (SRPA) a la luz de la justicia restaurativa. A partir de la revisión bibliográfica sobre justicia restaurativa y su relación con la justicia juvenil, lo establecido en el Código de Infancia y Adolescencia (ley 1098 de 2006) y el CONPES 3629 que plantea las disposiciones de política del Sistema de Responsabilidad Penal para Adolescentes, y finalmente, del trabajo de campo realizado con adolescentes privados de la libertad, más una entrevista realizada a un experto, se describe y explica que tanto las sanciones se acercan al paradigma de la justicia restaurativa, la cual se fija en dicho código como una de las finalidades del sistema alternativo para adolescentes. Finalmente, se hacen algunas recomendaciones para la solución de las fallas encontradas en este aspecto del SRPA.

Sistema de responsabilidad penal para adolescentes en la reincidencia de actos delictivos de los adolescentes en conflicto con la ley. caso: centro forjar ciudad bolívar

El presente trabajo de investigación tiene como objetivo analizar el papel del Centro Forjar Ciudad Bolívar en la reincidencia de actos delictivos de los adolescentes infractores, basado en la teoría de la justicia restaurativa que se busca generar desde el Sistema de Responsabilidad Penal para Adolescentes en Colombia. De esta manera, se pretende demostrar que, al ser una política pública para generar una justicia restaurativa, su implementación ha sido fundamental dentro de la localidad, para generar un proceso de reinserción social y acompañamiento para evitar la reincidencia de actos delictivos de estos adolescentes. Para lograr este objetivo se utilizará un análisis metodológico cualitativo, basándose en estudios de las fuentes primarias, trabajo de campo a partir de entrevistas realizadas en el Centro Forjar de Ciudad Bolívar, para entender el impacto de la política pública en la localidad.

Translation of the Decision of the International Court of Justice related to the Case concerning the dispute regarding navigational and related rights (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) Judgment

--

Corrective Justice vs. Social Justice in the Aftermath of War

How do we justify the practice of corrective justice for losses suffered during armed conflicts? This article seeks to show the force and relevance of this question, and to argue that, in cases of massively destructive wars, social justice should gain priority over corrective justice. Starting from a liberal Rawlsian conception of the relationship between corrective and social justice, it is argued that, paradoxically, the more destructive a war is, the less normative force corrective rights have and the higher priority policies of social justice, which guarantee basic rights to all citizens, should have.

The Demobilization Process of Paramilitaries in Colombia: Between Politics and Justice

The phenomenon of paramilitarism in Colombia has received an ambiguous treatment, balancing between political and criminal issues; an oscillation that has been intimately linked to the evolution of the Colombian internal conflict. This contribution analyzes the recent negotiations held with paramilitary groups by the administration of Alvaro Uribe Vélez (2002-2010). After a brief account of the dependency path that has determined this historical episode, I propose an assessment of the use of judicial categories by the various actors of the negotiations. The main argument is that those categories –war criminal, political criminal, drug smuggler, etc.– do not depend on the intrinsic nature of an armed actor, but are socially constructed by a conflictive process of material and symbolic struggles. The capacity to categorize private violence, as legitimate or illegitimate, political or criminal, appears as one of the basic manifestations of the state’s action, as well as one of the main conflicts presiding at the rocess of state formation.