Artículo publicado el 19 de octubre en el portal IJ Central.

A few weeks ago, a Symbolic Court Against Sexual Violence within the Colombian Armed Conflict met in Bogota, to deal with a range of cases related to sexual violence committed by armed groups in the Colombian internal conflict. This symbolic tribunal was integrated by five renowned experts on Women’s Rights .

The cases submitted to the tribunal result from a thorough selection process in which civil society organizations met with victims and survivors. The idea was to bring forth the victims without putting them at further risk, and looking to protect their identities, life and integrity. The Court was conceived as a place “aimed at making visible to the public the impact sexual violence has had in the context of armed conflict, especially emphasizing the rights of victims and the need to overcome the impunity that has characterized these crimes, and demand timely and effective attention by the state.”

This Tribunal made some recommendations urging the Colombian state to uphold their international obligations regarding the prevention, investigation, prosecution and judgment of gender violence. Colombia is a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination, the American Convention of Human Rights, the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence Against Women, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, among others. It also considered the Report on the human rights situation from the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in which it recommends the Attorney General’s office to adopt a policy to investigate the cases of gender violence and proceed with the investigations of the case already submitted.

Gender Violence and War

That gender violence has bean employed as a weapon of war, affecting women of every race, religion, ethnicity, age and status, sadly does not come as a surprise.

Unfortunately, the international community has continually failed to prevent the widespread and systematic violence against women in the context of armed conflicts.

In the Colombian case, the tribunal reported that among the crimes committed by the armed groups are: rape, enforced nudity, enforced contraception, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy and other gender crimes committed alongside other crimes, such as killing, enforced disappearances, kidnapping and torture. The judges said there is systematic gender violence in the Colombian armed conflict and that gender crimes are used as a weapon of war by the public forces, by the paramilitary groups and by the guerrillas, with the clear goal of “obtaining benefits in the developments of the hostilities.” Therefore, the Tribunal concluded, that if the Colombian authorities do not take the necessary steps – that is to investigate and prosecute those responsible for these types of crimes- then the ICC should address them.

Colombia is State Party to the ICC since November 2002 and its Criminal Code has a substantial regulation regarding international crimes. Nonetheless, it was also one of the two countries, along with France, that subscribed the disposition of Article 124, not accepting the ICC jurisdiction over war crimes for 7 years.

Colombia has been suffering an internal conflict for more than four decades; a conflict that appears unceasing, in which political corruption, drug-trafficking, paramilitaries and a high-level of violence are characteristic.

Colombia and the ICC: unresolved business?

The situation in Colombia has been on the ICC’s radar since, at least, 2006. At that time, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) declared it was “examining alleged crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court and investigations/proceedings conducted in Colombia against the allegedly most serious perpetrators, paramilitary leaders, politicians, guerrilla leaders and military personnel.” Later, the OTP added it was also analyzing allegations of international networks supporting armed groups committing crimes in Colombia.

The Court has not formally commenced any investigation because of the complementarity assured by the Rome Statute.  Colombia is classified as a “situation under analysis.” But the primary responsibility of investigating grave crimes remains under the jurisdiction of the Colombian tribunals. The ICC considers the Colombian judiciary capable and willing to carry out investigations of the crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction.

However, civil society organizations, including this symbolic Tribunal, consider that the Colombian judiciary is not addressing past and present international crimes, including gender violence, correctly.

Despite several visits by the OTP and other ICC officials, events and conferences, including the participation of President Santos in the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) last year, members of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and its league members – among other important NGOs - continue to call for ICC action in Colombia.

A recent report by Amnesty International notes the lack of reliable official statistics, and the fear around reporting gender-related crimes. It adds that the statistics available “do not clearly indicate cases of sexual violence against women and girls that may be conflict-related” and that “even when women muster the courage to report a case of rape or sexual violence, these are rarely investigated effectively.”

Before the current Prosecutor leaves….

… he must finish what his office started. Despite the efforts of the judiciary, the Constitutional Court and current laws adopted to acknowledge the rights of victims, we believe that the Office of the Prosecutor must provide a direct answer determining if the Colombian situation should be advanced to the status of official investigation.

Despite the 7-year moratorium for war crimes, at the very least all parties to the conflict have perpetrated crimes against humanity, including sexual violence as established in Art. 7.1.G of the Rome Statute. Moreno Ocampo leaves office next year and one of the debts he is leaving behind is the uncertainty regarding Colombia.

Fortunately he still has time to make a final decision, regardless of its outcome.

—-

Mariana Rodriguez Pareja is a Communications Expert and Human Rights Advocate. Twitter: @maritaerrepe

Salvador Herencia Carrasco. LL.M. University of Ottawa, Legal adviser of the Andean Commission of Jurists. E-mail: sherencia@cajpe.org.pe