Summary of Understanding Transitional Justice

## Introduction Transitional processes in Colombia after decades of armed conflict created specialized mechanisms to address crimes, reparations, truth-telling and territorial transformation. This material explains key institutions, models and specific thematic and territorial approaches used to address harm caused by conflict, with practical examples and clear definitions. > **Definition:** The Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) is a restorative-oriented judicial mechanism created to investigate and sanction the gravest crimes of the armed conflict in Colombia while prioritizing truth, reparation and non-repetition. ## Key institutional components ### Main institutions created by the 2016 Agreement - **Truth Commission (CEV):** Documents patterns and causes of the conflict and produces a final report with recommendations. - **Unit for the Search of Disappeared Persons (UBPD):** Locates and clarifies fate of disappeared people and coordinates searches with communities and families. - **Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP):** Judicial body that investigates, prosecutes and sanctions serious crimes with a restorative emphasis. > **Definition:** The Comprehensive System of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Non-Repetition (SIVJRNR) is the integrated framework created by the 2016 peace agreement combining judicial and non-judicial mechanisms to address victims’ rights and prevent future violations. ## How the system balances judicial and restorative goals ### Restorative orientation of sanctions - Sanctions under the JEP are designed to: - Prioritize truth-telling and acknowledgment of responsibility. - Provide integral reparations to victims and communities. - Promote reconciliation and reconstruction of the social fabric. ### Procedural shift - When perpetrators fully acknowledge truth and responsibility, procedures move from adversarial litigation to dialogical, restorative processes focused on clarifying facts and arranging reparative measures. > **Definition:** Restorative measures are actions aimed at repairing harm to victims and communities, fostering responsibility-taking and rebuilding social relationships rather than focusing solely on punishment. ## Macro-case selection and prioritisation model The JEP uses a macro-case model to identify systemic patterns of violence rather than treating every crime as an isolated event. - Two complementary criteria: 1. **Territorial cases:** Target regions where violence was intense and prolonged (e.g., Cauca). 2. **Thematic cases:** Focus on specific patterns or types of violations (e.g., gender-based violence, forced displacement). Table: Territorial vs Thematic Cases | Feature | Territorial cases | Thematic cases | |---|---:|---| | Focus | Regions with concentrated conflict | Specific patterns or crimes across regions | | Objective | Understand local dynamics and structural causes | Identify systemic modalities and perpetrators of certain crimes | | Example | Río Cauca / Cauca River harms | Gender-based and sexual violence macro-case | ## Notable thematic and territorial examples ### Río Cauca (Macro Case 05) - The JEP recognized the Cauca River as a victim due to contamination, ecosystem destruction and flow alterations caused by warfare and extractive activities. - Cultural and spiritual importance for Indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities was central: the river was affected as a living element and, in some instances, used as a mass grave. - A dedicated restorative process for the river seeks ecological, cultural and symbolic repair. Did you know that the JEP recognized a river as a victim, reflecting harm to ecosystems, cultural practices and spiritual life for local communities? ### Gender-based and sexual violence (Macro Case 11) - Focuses on sexual and reproductive violence and crimes driven by discrimination against sexual orientation or gender identity. - Recognizes LGBTQ+ victims within territorial cases and applies specialized protocols. - Pe