Sexual Violence Against Women as a Strategy to Dispossess Land in the Colombian Armed Conflict

This article reviews the evidence collected by diverse national and international organizations regarding the relationship between sexual violence against women, forced displacement, and dispossession in the context of the Colombian armed conflict. To this end, it uses the concept of “sexual violence regimes” to highlight that the endspursued by sexual violence are not always exhausted by simple consummation (that is, the act of sexual violence itself), but depending on the context, can be connected with broader strategic goals of armed actors. At the same time, this document admits the difficulty of proving this relationship with respect to judicial procedures, and thus sets out the possibility of creating a rebuttable presumption, in the framework of “unconstitutional state of affairs” created by judgment T-025 of 2004, that alleviates the burden of proof of the victims, and serves as a catalyst to promote new genderbased mechanisms of reparations.

Reflections about Complicity and its Application in some Socio Economics Crimes

In Colombia, the definitions of crimes are found in the special part of the Criminal Code. They are set out as though the only way of to commit them was by being the author of the punishable conduct there described. Nevertheless, in the general part of the Criminal Code, we find other forms of criminal responsibility for the conduct described in the special part. Complicity is one of those ways. Although complicity is established in the Criminal Code, it does not appear as a criminal definition and, as such it is ignored or, worse, applied incorrectly. For those reasons, this article tries to reflect upon the validity of complicity. Accordingly, this article analyzes: what is complicity, what is the difference between complicity and co-authorship and how would complicity work in some practical cases related to socio-economic crimes, in which it has being overlooked or, has been used incorrectly. The article concludes that complicity is still valid, and that the correct application of complicity materializes the ideal of justice.