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.

In a new analysis, the ICTJ addresses one of the crucial points of the peace negotiations between the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’s Army (FARC-EP): the possibility of providing recourse to the broadest amnesty possible and pardons as part of the treatment of the different crimes committed in the framework of more than fifty years of armed conflict.

Amid deteriorating human rights conditions in the country, the lower house of Burundi’s National Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favor of withdrawing from the Rome Statute, the treaty that created the International Criminal Court. “Burundi should reconsider this ill-conceived decision, which undermines efforts at the national level to bring justice, peace, and stability to the country,” said ICTJ President David Tolbert.

A new paper by the ICTJ on the peace negotiations in Colombia considers the competing goals of punishing members of the FARC who are deemed most responsible for committing serious crimes.

In little less than 10 months, Colombia has witnessed the creation of a completely new jurisdiction, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP). JEP has already opened two cases and three situations in its Chamber for the Acknowledgment of Truth and Responsibility.

BOGOTÁ, May 12, 2011—The decision by President Juan Manuel Santos to recognize the existence of an internal armed conflict in Colombia is a positive step toward transparency and truth-telling in that country, ICTJ said today. The Colombian government has denied for years the existence of an internal armed conflict there, although it was never in doubt from an international law perspective.

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 political crisis in Venezuela seems to have reached a stalemate. In September, the Norway-mediated negotiations between the Maduro government and the opposition came to a halt, leaving both sides struggling for the upper hand. But since it remains difficult for either party to prevail, it is likely that this impasse is a momentary setback rather than an indication that the negotiations are defunct.

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 International Center for Transitional Justice welcomes the recent agreement between the Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia to create a special criminal jurisdiction as part of an integrated system of truth, justice, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence.