“Farewell to arms, farewell to war, welcome to peace.” Those were the words of the leader of Colombia’s largest rebel group—the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)—when FARC and the Colombian government agreed upon a peace deal in 2016, after 52 years of war. For many Colombians however, justice was as much of a priority as peace. For this reason, they rejected the peace deal in a referendum, forcing then-President Juan Manuel Santos to pass the hastily renegotiated agreement through Congress without a people’s vote.
Since then, peace in Colombia has been fragile. The current president, Iván Duque, who replaced Santos in 2018 was elected on the grounds that he would change the FARC peace treaty. The relatively young president enjoyed the support of Santos’s predecessor, the Conservative Alvaro Uribe, who spearheaded opposition to Santos’s peace deal and has only delayed the implementation of the deal. Some FARC leaders are not convinced by the deal either. In August 2019, former FARC commander Iván Márquez broke the peace deal he had negotiated and called on his followers to take up arms again.
It seems that peace in Colombia depends on whether Colombians feel that justice has been served to the former rebels. This dilemma as to whether the peace deal can bring justice has recently been in the limelight as former FARC leaders testify in court.
FORCED RECRUITMENT AND SEXUAL ASSAULT
The testimony of fifteen former FARC leaders in the Special Jurisdiction of Peace (JEP) has brought up various atrocities committed, including forced recruitment and sexual abuse by the rebels. Rodrigo Londono, who now heads the new FARC (Common Alternative Revolutionary Force) political party, said that the rebel group did not permit sexual abuse or forced recruitment. However, he has acknowledged that there may have been misconduct on FARC’s part, asking for forgiveness and sharing his “respect and solidarity with the victims”. Many victims feel that this is not good enough. One victim, who now leads a campaign group on behalf of female victims, described the trials as a mere tick-box exercise.
Another former FARC-leader-turned-senator, Pablo Catumbo, has given testimony on FARC’s recruitment of child soldiers. The JEP reports that around 8,000 children volunteered or were forced to join FARC, around 40% of whom have received reparations worth around $15 million. However, an activist and former FARC hostage has received evidence of nearly 40,000 minors being recruited, thanks to his radio program “Voices of Kidnapping”. Both these revelations have left many—especially victims—feeling that these testimonies are meaningless and that there is no intent to serve justice.
A QUESTION OF JURISDICTION
Ongoing testimonies have also further muddied the waters surrounding the assassination of the 1995 Presidential candidate Álvaro Gómez Hurtado. It was believed that members of the drug traffickers the Cali Cartel were responsible for Hurtado’s murder. However, shortly following the recent 25th anniversary of the incident, FARC claimed responsibility for the shooting. This was an unexpected confession. FARC claimed that they were motivated to assassinate Hurtado because he represented “those that had declared war on the FARC-EP”. There is a certain amount of doubt around this admission, chiefly voiced by Hurtado’s family. Hurtado’s son believes that this is an attempt to “exculpate those who were really the masterminds behind the crime,” whilst his cousin has accused the FARC of attempting to disrupt criminal proceedings by presenting the information to the JEP, rather than to the public prosecutor’s office.
Some, like Hurtado’s cousin, feel that by using JEP’s jurisdiction, FARC are using the process of transitional justice to avoid ordinary justice. This is because JEP allows FARC members to keep their roles as senators whilst testifying to crimes in exchange for legal benefits. It will, therefore, be hard to convince some Colombians that justice is truly being served.
With the alternately disturbing and dubious nature of revelations from FARC members’ testimonies as well as Duque’s reluctance to implement the peace deal, the prospect of peace and justice in Colombia is in doubt. Back in 2017, the International Criminal Court (ICC) warned Colombia about the importance of punishing those who are “most responsible” for international crimes, which is part of the nation’s obligation to the ICC. It remains to be seen what else will be revealed throughout the ongoing transitional justice process, but it is vital both for the future of peace in Colombia and the credibility of the rule of law that true justice is served.
William is a modern languages student at the University of Bristol and has a training contract offer at a Magic Circle firm. He is especially interested in technology and the law developing around it.