6 The Army Commander, General Mario Montoya, denied that the pressure to obtain operational results has anything to do with arbitrary violations of the right to life of civilians: “El Tiempo: Another case is that of the Fourth Brigade and complaints regarding human rights (sic). Do you think the pressure for results has anything to do with these supposed irregularities? Army Commander, General Mario Montoya: No. I don’t believe it has anything to do with that. If it were a generalized situation, we could think that the fact of demanding results would lead to that.” “These cases should never have ocurred”. El Tiempo, Bogotá, June 11 2006, pages. 1-7. In the same sense spoke the Minister of Defense, Camilo Ospina: “El Tiempo: Some officers say that they feel under pressure to obtain results and that this explains many mistakes… “Minister of Defense: The pressure for results happens in a very different way, like in any company. But the results are not the dead or the injured; the results are global figures. The important thing here is that homicides go down, that arrests go up, and that kidnappings decrease; the result is the policy, not the figures on dead individuals or anything of the sort.” “A good opportunity exists to end confrontation,” El Tiempo, Bogotá, July 2 2006, pages. 1-3. 7 Testimony by “three colonels and two majors, commanders of key battalions in the struggle against the FARC, in the south and the east of the country (and who requested that their names be omitted to avoid retaliation)” “Each day some 17 men leave the Army,” El Tiempo, Bogotá, July 2 2006, pages. 1-2. Another factor that has a decisive influence on the increase in the violations of the right to life by State forces is the pressure for “positive” results exerted by the President on the State forces. Although high-ranking military commanders and the Minister of Defense deny that the urgency for “positives” to show the success of the war against terrorism encourages this type of human rights violations6, some members of the National Army have made public statements to the contrary. According to five Army officers, “people cannot possibly imagine the psychological torture of having to show results every day”7. According COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [5 ] 10 See the document Ejecuciones extrajudiciales directamente atribuibles a la Fuerza Publica en Colombia, julio de 2002 a junio de 2006, (Extrajudicial executions directly attributable to the State Forces in Colombia, July 2002 to June 2006), prepared by the Human Rights and Humanitarian Law Observatory of the human rights NGO coalition Coordinación Colombia-Europa-Estados Unidos for hearings of the Inter-American Human Rights Comission in Washington, October 23, 2006 . 11 On January 25 2006, at the Patriots’ Battalion of the Sixth Brigade with headquarters in Honda (Tolima), 21 soldiers between 18 and 24 were subjected to torture during a training exercise at the Army’s Center for Training and Instruction (CIE in Spanish). The soldiers were beaten with fists, sticks and machetes, kicked, and submitted to fake asphyxiations and drowning, as well as subjected to verbal aggressions and burned on different parts of their bodies. Some were made to eat animal excrements, and others were victims of rape and sexual humiliation. 12 On April 10 2004, near the hamlet of Potosí, jurisdiction of the municipality of Cajamarca (Tolima), peasant farmers Albeiro Mendoza Reyes, 17 years old; Yamile Urueña Arango, 17; Norberto Mendoza, 24; a child of 14; and a six month-old baby were executed by troops belonging to the Army’s Pijao Battalion. The State forces justified what happened as a military error. 13 On March 20 2004 in Guaitarilla (Nariño), four civilians and nine members of the State forces belonging to the anti-kidnapping group (Gaula) of the National Police were executed extrajudicially by troops of the Boyacá Battalion of the Army’s Third Division. 14 On May 22 2006, on the rural property La Cristalina in the municipality of Jamundí (Valle del Cauca), 10 men belonging to the Dijin, the antinarcotics elite corps, and an informant were executed extrajudicially by members of the Army. In the majority of cases, the violations were preceded by arbitrary detentions and, in some cases, by forced disappearances. Afterwards, since military operations demand results, the victims were reported as guerrilla members dead in combat. In one sample of 98 cases of extrajudicial executions perpetrated between July 2002 and June 2006, 46 civilians were presented as dead in combat in one of the military operations mentioned above10. Additionally, in this period extraordinarily grave incidents have occurred, such as the torture of soldiers of the Patriots’ Battalion in Honda (Tolima)11, six persons in Cajamarca (Tolima)12, the massacre of Guaitarilla (Nariño)13 and the massacre of Jamundí (Valle del Cauca)14, among others. These deeds demonstrate the presence of profound structural problems within the State forces and are worthy of serious reflexion on the role of the Armed Forces to guarantee the security of everyone in the country. COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [7 ] 21 This figure refers exclusively to persons part of non governmental human rights organizations, members of social organizations whose function within the organization was to carry out tasks of promoting and defending human rights; and State employees that carried out such work. However, the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, based on Article 1 of the Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Individuals, Groups and Institutions to Promote and Protect Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms defines human rights defenders as “any person who acts in favor of a human right (or several human rights) of an individual or group”. Applying this criterion, we can state that at least 41 persons were assassinated or disappeared forcibly during 2005. (Office of the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights, Los defensores de derechos humanos: protección del derecho a defender los derechos humanos [Human Rights Defenders: Protection of the right to defend human rights.] Information Booklet n.° 29, New York, 2004). 22 Escuela Nacional Sindical (ENS), Informe sobre la violación a los derechos humanos de los y las sindicalistas colombianos en el año 2005 [Report on Violations of the Rights of Colombian Male and Female Unionized Workers in the Year 2005] ENS, area human rights and labor affairs, Medellín, April 2006, page 11, in www. ens.org downloaded June 8 2006. Of the total deaths registered from July 2002 to June 2006, 1,324 were women. At least 1,342 young people and 678 girls and boys lost their lives due to the same causes during the same period. Assassinations and forced disappearances of human rights defenders persist: Between July 2002 and June 2006, at least 52 were assassinated or forcibly disappeared (an average of one victim per month). 13 of the victims were women.21 During the preceding years, the monthly average of attacks against human rights defenders was the same: between July 1996 and June 2002, 74 human rights defenders lost their lives, that is, an average of one person each month. Attacks against labor-union organizations continue. Between January 2003 and December 2005, 90 members of union organizations lost their lives each year (271 victims). During the three previous years (January 2000 to December 2002), the yearly average of union members assassinated or disappeared was 185 victims (555 deaths during the period). This represents a 48% decrease in violations of the right to life. However, there was an increase of 33% in the number of members of union organizations arbitrarily detained each year: between January 2003 and December 2005, an average of 60 union members were deprived of their freedom each year (182 victims). Between January 2000 and December 2002, 18 union members were arbitrarily detained each year.22 COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [11 ] Especially vulnerable population groups 25 Coordinación Colombia Europa Estados Unidos, Observatorio de Derechos Humanos y derecho humanitario, Libertad: “Seguridad democrática”. Detenciones arbitrarias en Colombia: 7 de agosto de 2002 a 6 de agosto de 2004, Documentos temáticos No.2, Bogotá, 2006, pg 75 y ss; and databank of the Colombian Commission of Jurists. 26 The present document does not include complete information regarding the number of kidnapped persons in the last year because a right of petition presented to the National Police has not yet been answered, and this is the source upon which the Colombian Commission of Jurists bases its final reports on this topic. However, the statistics of the official entity Fondelibertad indicate that between January 2002 and April 2006, at least 4,115 persons were victims of kidnappings carried out by guerrilla and paramilitary groups. The guerrilla group FARC was the presumed author of 2,211 kidnappings (57.73%), the guerrilla group ELN was the presumed author of 1,389 cases (33.75%). Responsibility for 515 kidnappings (12.5%) was attributed to paramilitary groups, in spite of having declared a cease of hostilities in December of 2002. During the period, there were cases of persons kidnapped by members of the State forces, but these are not registered by Fondelibertad. From 1996 until today, no fewer than 5,461 persons remain in captivity. Fundación País Libre, Carta abierta, March 2006, www.paislibre.org Between August 7, 2002 and June 30, 2006, at least 6,912 persons were detained arbitrarily in Colombia (in average, five persons daily). These figures are in contrast with those registered during the six preceding years (July 1996 to June 2002), in which around 2,869 persons were arbitrarily deprived of their freedom (an average of more than one person each day)25. The practice of kidnappings persists. Between July 2002 and June 2005, 4,650 kidnappings were reported. This means that in average 1,550 persons were kidnapped each year. 2,841 kidnappings (61%) were attributed to the combatant groups: to guerrilla groups, 2,456 (52.81%), and to paramilitary groups, 385 kidnappings (8.2% of the total number). During the period there were cases of persons kidnapped by members of the State forces that were not registered by the national police26. COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [13 ] The right to freedom 28 Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y el Desplazamiento Codhes [Consultancy on Human Rights and Displacement, Codhes], and Colombian Bishops’ Conference, Desafíos para construir nación [The Challenges of Nationbuilding], Bogotá, 2006, pages 26 and 34; “No ceden cifras de desplazamiento” [“Displacement figures do not abate”], El Colombiano, daily newspaper, December 22 2005, www.elcolombiano.com; http://www. codhes.org/cifra/Dpto_Recp_Pers_2004.pdf 29 “Entre julio y septiembre, cerca de 100.000 personas fueron desplazadas”, [“Between July and September, close to 100,000 persons were displaced”] El Espectador, daily newspaper, October 26 2005, www.elespectador. com 30 International Committee of the Red Cross, ICRC, regional news on March 23 2006, published in www.cicr. org (downloaded July 15 2006). More than one million persons were displaced between July 2002 and December 2005: 1’014,647 cases were registered during this period, added to those displaced in previous years. Cases of forced displacement have been registered in 87% of the country’s municipalities28. The absence of an effective policy for the prevention of human rights violations and forced displacement is evident in the increase in the number of displaced persons. According to the Consultancy on Human Rights and Displacement (Codhes in Spanish), between July and September of 2005, nearly 100,000 persons were forcibly displaced, an increase of 32 percent with regard to the same three- month period in 200429. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, “the number of persons displaced as a result of the conflict has increased significantly during the first two months of 2006 with respect to the same period of the previous year.” This international organization adds that “the population has suffered greater restrictions in its movement (…) and forced displacement has affected mainly the population living in the departments of Meta, Nariño and Cauca”30. COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [15 ] A Violation of multiple rights: Forced displacement 33 That day saw the extrajudicial executions of union leaders Leonel Goyeneche, treasurer of the union federation Central Unitaria de Trabajadores (Cut), Arauca section; Jorge Prieto, president of Anthoc, Arauca section; and Alirio Martínez, president of the agrarian union, Sindicato Agrícola, and leader of the National Association of Rural Workers, Asociación Nacional de Usuarios Campesinos (Anuc). 34 On September 7 2004, the Office of the General Prosecutor ordered the arrest of Army Sub-lieutenant Juan Pablo Ordóñez Cañón and of the professional soldiers Oscar Saúl Cuta Hernández and John Alejandro Hernández Suárez, who participated in the military operation. According to the General Prosecutor’s Office, after evaluating the evidence it was established that no confrontation took place between members of the Army and the union leaders. Ballistic evidence shows that the shots were fired at a short distance and the victims were apparently defenseless. An arrest warrant was issued also against Daniel Rozo Caballero, who appears to have been the informant who accompanied the Army on the day of the operation. 35 U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in Colombia, U.N. Commission on Human Rights, 62nd Period of Sessions, doc. E/CN.4/2006/9, January 20 2006, Par. 22. In other cases, and in spite of the existence of conclusive evidence, the Observatory has abstained from including information on extrajudicial executions. Such is the case of the extrajudicial execution of three union leaders on August 5 2004 in Tame (Arauca) carried out by members of Brigade XVIII of the National Army33. According to the initial version by the public security forces, the union members belonged to the guerrilla and had been shot down in combat. After evaluating the evidence, the Prosecutor General’s Office established that there had been no confrontation and ordered the arrest of an Army sub-lieutenant and two professional soldiers who participated in the military operation, and an informant that accompanied the Army. Nonetheless, up to now the Observatory has abstained from including this case in its register34. The Office of the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights drew attention to this flaw in its report on Colombia for the year 200535. At a meeting held by nongovernmental organizations with the Government in the presence of the G-24 on April 6 2006, the Director of the Human Rights Observatory of the Office of the Vice- President was asked if these three cases of assassination had been included in the statistics of the Vice-Presidency, in conformity with the recommendation by the High Commissioner in that sense. The Director of the Observatory answered negatively, and she gave as justification the fact that there was no legal ruling declaring the formal responsibility of the State forces. She was asked then if the records of cases attributed to guerrilla groups by the statistics of the Observatory were effectively underpinned by a criminal sentence. The director admitted that in such cases the Observatory did not expect to have judicial sentences declaring formally the responsibility of the guerrilla groups or combatants. This shows that the government handles its statistics on human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law with less than objective criteria COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [17 ] In the face of the grave situation of human rights and humanitarian law in Colombia, it is necessary for a comprehensive human rights policy to be put into place that includes a program of truly democratic security, that keeps wide open and develops the spaces for negotiation leading to the political solution of the armed conflict, and that is supported and supervised in a purposeful way by the international community. A comprehensive human rights policy is needed. That guarantees both civil and political rights as well as economic, social, and cultural rights. That has human rights as ends and means of any security operation. A policy is essential that includes a truly democratic security program. That confronts all the violent actors. That is developed for the benefit of all sectors of the population, especially with the displaced population as starting point. That is executed with a scrupulous respect for the civilian population. COLOMBIA 2002-2006: SITUATION REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW [19 ] Proposals How the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ) processes its information The CCJ has created a database on sociopolitical violence with the purpose of keeping a daily and permanent record on human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law that take place in Colombia. At present the information processed by the CCJ stems from the following sources: 20 national and regional newspapers1; two weekly news magazines with nation- wide circulation2; direct complaints gathered by the CCJ; complaints made to other human rights organizations, national as well as regional, that monitor the situation of human rights and humanitarian law; information submitted by the national authorities (Public Defender’s Office, Inspector General’s Office, Prosecutor General’s Office, Vice-President’s Office, Armed Forces and Police) and the publication Noche y Niebla (Night and Fog) of the CINEP Data Bank. The CCJ data base is structured in four broad fields of information. The first one registers general information regarding the victim – date and place of the act, name of the victim, age, sex, and finally information on the person’s social status. This last indicator aims to identify elements of the social circumstances of the victim which might explain the attack; for example, if it concerns a displaced person or someone socially marginalized3. The second field gathers information on the victim’s activities. It is structured in four sectors of activity: The first refers to the work sector and registers information on the occupation of the victim. The second refers to labor union-related activities and registers whether the person belonged to an organization of this type, the name of the organization, and the position he or she held in the union. The third refers to social sector and registers information regarding the victim’s social activity, pointing out the name and character of the organization as well as the position held by the victim (including human rights defenders). The fourth refers to the political sector and registers information on the political activity of the victim, pointing out whether he or she was a militant in, or belonged to, some type of political party and the office held within it. 1 El Tiempo, El Espectador, El Colombiano, Diario del Huila, Diario del Otún, Diario del Sur, El Heraldo, El Liberal, El Meridiano de Córdoba, El Meridiano de Sucre, El Mundo, El Nuevo Día, El País, El Universal, Hoy Diario del Magdalena, La Nación, La Opinión, La Patria, La Tarde, Vanguardia Liberal. 2 Semana and Cambio. 3 Socially marginalized persons are indigent people, street children, beggars, prostitutes, homosexuals who practice prostitution, drug addicts, persons with a criminal record, and presumed delinquents. The third field registers information on human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law committed in each case, as well as their presumed authors. The data base registers only information on violations to the rights to freedom, personal integrity, and life. As to responsibilities, the register indicates the presumed generic author and subsequently specifies the front, block, or battalion, as the case may be. Lastly, the fourth field of information records the sources, namely newspapers, magazines, complaints, communications with the authorities, and other sources of information mentioned above. Procedures for the inclusion of information in the data base All the information registered in the data base must previously undergo a selection process. Out of the whole of the violent acts registered daily, the ones chosen constitute cases of sociopolitical violence according to the following criteria: 1. Characteristics of the victim: Taken into account is the activity carried out by the victim – that is, whether the victim took part in any kind of political or social activism. Such cases are always included in the data base. Likewise, we take into account social characteristics: for example, if the victim belonged to a sector of the population considered vulnerable, or whether he or she belonged to a socially marginalized group. In such cases, the social circumstances of the victim constitute an indication that the act may be one of sociopolitical violence, but this in itself is not sufficient to include it in the data base. This is why other elements are examined, such as the ones described below. 2. The presumed author of the act: Included in the data base are all cases in which the presumed author is one of the armed groups (State agents, paramilitaries, guerrilla groups). In cases where the presumed author is unknown or is an unidentified armed group, both the characteristics of the victim and the way in which the act was committed are taken into consideration. [22 ] 3. The way in which the act is committed: Constant observation of violent deeds has taught us how to identify the modus operandi of the armed groups in the country. Therefore, one of the elements to be taken into account when deciding whether to include a case or not is the way in which the act is carried out. Although it is not a determinant factor, it is an element which, when combined with the other two mentioned above, helps to identify cases of sociopolitical violence. The following situations are considered: • Whether there is evidence of torture • Whether the persons are on a list of potential or threatened victims • Whether the victims were removed from their homes by force • Whether previous threats had been made • Whether the victims were former militants of a political party, or had previously belonged to a social organization; whether they were labor union members or human rights defenders. Once the cases have been selected, a process of codification is undertaken of the information to be included in the CCJ data base. Process of verification of the information One of the main concerns involved in the work of the CCJ is an adequate verification of the cases included in the data base. To that end, the CCJ has implemented a permanent system of exchange of information with the authorities charged with monitoring the situation of human rights and humanitarian law, and this with two main objectives: on the one hand, to establish that the acts actually took place; and on the other, to establish the state of the investigations related to human rights violations in the country. The procedure consists in requesting, through rights of petition, information from the Ombudsman’s Office, the Inspector General’s Office, the General Prosecutor’s Office and the Armed Forces and the Police, depending on the case: whether they are aware of the case and what actions have been undertaken in order to shed light on the facts and punish those responsible for the violations. Likewise, regional organizations are sought out that carry out field work and which, in many cases, may have direct knowledge of the facts. Through these organizations, information is sought from the victims of human rights violations regarding the actions undertaken by them and the response given by the State to their demands and requests. Finally, the CCJ carries out visits to the regions in order to monitor the human rights situation, during which it gathers information through direct interviews with the local authorities, with organizations that work in the field, and with the victims of human rights violations. During such visits, we have been able to confirm information on cases that were already known to us and gather information on new cases. Through these visits, we have been able to ascertain that the cases registered in the CCJ’s data base constitute only an underreported reflection of the real situation. The listings of victims in the data base can be consulted at the CCJ. [23 ] THE COLOMBIAN COMMISSION OF JURISTS: WHO ARE WE? In accordance with our mandate, through judicial means we seek the full respect of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights in Colombia, as well as of humanitarian law, and we acknowledge the universal, indivisible, and interdependent nature of these rights. According to our by-laws, the work of the Colombian Commission aims to contribute to the development of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in conformity with the purposes and principles of the Chart of the United Nations, as well as to the full force of the social and democratic rule of law in Colombia. We regard human rights as a value in itself that cannot be subordinated to any other aims. We constitute a pluralist organization, not linked to any confession or political party. We are a nongovernmental organization with consultative status before the United Nations, affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists in Geneva and of the Andean Commission of Jurists in Lima. To reach our objectives, we gather and analyze information on human rights and humanitarian law; we make public such information; we promote the knowledge and use of the legal instruments that protect human rights and humanitarian law; and we carry out legal protection activities. We initiated activities on May 2, 1988 and acquired legal status through Resolution 1060 of August 18, 1988, by the Office of the Mayor of Bogotá. Members of the General Assembly of the Colombian Commission of Jurists: Ana María Díaz, Gustavo Gallón Giraldo (Director), Carlos Alberto Marín Ramírez (Deputy Director for Programming), Luz Marina Monzón Cifuentes, Carlos Rodríguez-Mejía (Deputy Director of Operations), Humberto Sánchez Verano, Hernando Valencia Villa. Design: Torre Gráfica Comisión Colombiana de Juristas Calle 72 Nº 12-65 p. 7 Bogotá – Colombia Teléfonos: (571) 3768200 – (571) 3434710 e-mail: ccj@coljuristas.org web:www.coljuristas.org