Resource Library

Throughout 2023, ICTJ’s experts have offered their unique perspective on breaking news around the globe as part of the World Report. Their insightful commentaries have brought into focus the impact these events have on victims of human right violations as well as larger struggles for peace and justice. In this edition, we look back on the past year through the Expert’s Choice column.

Colombia’s new president Gustavo Petro was elected to office on a progressive campaign to strengthen democracy, implement social reforms, and bring “total peace” to the country. His approach to peace encompasses political negotiations with all remaining insurgent groups and simultaneous dialogues with criminal organizations geared toward their voluntary submission to justice in exchange for punitive leniency. But eight months into his administration, Petro’s efforts to deliver on his campaign promise are facing numerous challenges.

The end of 2022 in Venezuela was marked by signs of willingness from all parties to take concrete steps toward democracy. The government and the opposition resumed negotiations and agreed to allow the United Nations to manage a fund for billions of dollars of frozen assets, which would be gradually released to address the country’s humanitarian crisis. The United States authorized the Chevron Corporation to resume limited operations for importing Venezuelan oil. Finally, the 2015 National Assembly voted to end the opposition-led interim government. While these steps are initial ones to create the conditions for trust among the parties, they offer opportunities to improve the dire circumstances in which many Venezuelans currently live.

Throughout 2022, ICTJ’s experts weighed in on breaking news in more than 10 countries, offering incisive analyses of the political dynamics behind the coverage and the implications for justice, peace, and the rights of victims. In this December edition of the World Report, we look back at the year that was through our Expert’s Choice commentaries, bringing you all of our team’s valuable insights together in one place.

The recent move by the signatories to the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS) to extend the peace agreement’s life for another 24 months has not come as a surprise. While there have been some positive, though sporadic steps toward fulfilling the R-ARCSS, its...

When reflecting on peace agreements and their implementation, it is tempting to begin by saying that these processes are generally slow and complex. While that may be true in many contexts, it contributes little to the discussion about what has happened in Colombia since the government signed a final peace deal in November 2016 with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC-EP—the oldest and largest guerrilla group in the county—that ostensibly ended 50 years of war.

The signing of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan on September 12, 2018, has been lauded as the best opportunity for peace in the country. However, the continued delays in implementing it, including the establishment of stipulated transitional justice mechanisms, have raised growing concerns within the international community. One essential part of the agreement that has not been executed is the consolidation of the military and the opposition and rebel forces into one army.

On September 14, the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) publicly apologized to the victims of the kidnappings they perpetrated during the armed conflict. This unprecedented public declaration from a non-state armed group merits reflection from both the perspective of the transitional justice field as a whole and its implications for Colombia.

On August 4th, former President Alvaro Uribe surprised the country with a tweet announcing that he would be placed under house arrest for suspected witness tampering and obstruction of justice by the Special Instruction Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice as part of an investigation that has been underway since 2018. According to the court, this decision was made out of a concern for possible obstruction of justice, which appears to be consistent with the ongoing investigation into these same charges. This is undoubtedly an unprecedented situation.

It may seem trivial for me to write about why those who continue to mark July 17 as "International Justice Day" should finally stop calling it that. Many human rights groups (including ICTJ), United Nations agencies, and governments have been publicly using that phrase since 2010. It is for victims of massive and systematic human rights violations, including abuses that amount to international crimes under the Rome Statute, that it is important to end the misconception that the phrase encourages.