Peace talks
COLOMBIA: The Colombian Government and the FARC do not agree as to
the type of justice to be applied after the peace agreement
FARC insisted on the formation of a committee of national and international jurists, to explore with all the communities the scope of State responsibility for what happened in the last decades of internal conflict. In late August, seven of the nine judges of the Constitutional Court gave, after six months of intense legal debate, its blessing to the Legal Framework for Peace, the 'road map' of the Colombian State in negotiations with rebel groups. The judges said it was not against the Constitution that the State should prioritize the investigation and punishment of major crimes committed in the context of the conflict. However, they set clear limits to the scope of peace negotiations. They said, for example, that those who aspire to the benefits of alternative penalties shall meet requirements such as ending the war, giving up the arms, delivering children in their ranks and the bodies of the victims. They also pointed out to the need to adopt transitional justice measures. The next step would be for Congress to regulate the norm and for Prosecution to classify the crimes and name those responsible. On the other hand, the International Criminal Court (ICC) sent a letter to the Constitutional Court, indicating that too low a sentence or a pardon for certain crimes within the framework of agreements to be reached with the FARC, would immediately imply the ICC could apply its jurisdiction in Colombia. Timoshenko, leader of the FARC, rejected the government's decision, as it was not agreed with the guerrilla. Moreover, the FARC's negotiating delegation in Cuba said that the FARC would not comply with a legal framework which has been unilaterally designed. (El Tiempo, El Colombiano, El Espectador, Semana, 1-30/08/13)