Amnesty International reiterates its support for the work of the Office in Colombia of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to improve respect for human rights. Its work, especially human rights monitoring, will become even more critical given the uncertain human rights challenges of a peace agreement between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). To address these challenges, especially preventing human rights abuses and violations and combatting impunity, the Office’s monitoring role should be strengthened.
This statement presents an overview of Amnesty International’s concerns in Colombia, and recommendations to HRC members and observer states.
The peace process
The peace process has made such progress since official talks began in 2012 that Colombia is now closer than ever to putting an end to a 50-year-old armed conflict that has left an indelible scar on millions of women, men and children. The FARC’s unilateral ceasefire and the government’s suspension of aerial bombardments against FARC positions has alleviated some of the worst effects of the conflict on civilians living in rural areas. The agreement on victims of the conflict, which was made public last December, marks an important, albeit flawed, first step in addressing justice.
The involvement of the international community in the peace process is very important. For example, the recently adopted UN Security Council resolution 2261 (2016) authorizing a post-peace agreement mission in Colombia to monitor and verify compliance with the cease-fire and cessation of hostilities can, if effectively implemented, boost prospects for peace.
However, the legacy of widespread as well as systematic crimes under international law and human rights abuses and violations, and entrenched impunity for them, means that, despite the progress towards peace, many seemingly intractable conflict-related human rights and humanitarian challenges persist and could very likely become more acute in a post-conflict environment. For this reason, the groundswell of well-founded optimism should be tempered with caution.
While the agreement on victims of the conflict is a significant development and a clear sign that an end to hostilities is tantalizingly close, it nevertheless contains a number of provisions, as well as a number of ambiguities, that appear inconsistent with international law and standards on the right of victims to truth, justice and reparation. For example, the non-custodial sanctions set out in the agreement for those who acknowledge responsibility for grave violations of human rights and grave breaches of international humanitarian law do not appear to be proportionate to the grave nature of crimes under international law. As such, those sanctions may fail to comply with the state’s obligation to prevent and punish such crimes under international law and thereby continue to undermine effective accountability.