Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence debate -
Tuesday, 18 Oct 2022

Justice for Colombia: Discussion

Chairman

I remind those present in the committee room to exercise responsibility to protect themselves and others from the risk of contracting Covid-19. The first item on this afternoon's agenda is our meeting with representatives of Justice for Colombia. This is not the first occasion on which we have had an opportunity to engage with this group. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Hasan Dodwell, director, and Mr. Niall Finn, parliamentary officer. The format of our meeting is in the usual manner whereby we will hear the witnesses' opening statement followed by a question-and-answer session with members of the committee. I ask members to be concise in their questions to allow everybody an opportunity to participate.

Witnesses and members are reminded of the longstanding parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make that person in any way identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of any person or entity. Therefore, if statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks and any such direction must be complied with.

Members are reminded that they are only allowed to participate in this meeting if they are physically located on the Leinster House complex. I remind representatives of Justice for Colombia, Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Finn, that we are operating a hybrid format, in that some members are present in the committee room, while others are participating in the meeting from within the Leinster House complex, such as Deputy Stanton who is in his office.

I thank Mr. Dodwell and call him to make his opening statement.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

I am director of Justice for Colombia. I am sure most committee members met my predecessor when she came before the committee previously. We are an Irish and British organisation founded in 2002. We have been supported by the Irish and British trade union movements to work in support of peace, human rights and social justice in Colombia. The organisation was founded in response to the high levels of violence against trade unionists, human rights activists and community activists more generally in Colombia. As we all know, there has been an historically problematic situation in Colombia in terms of human rights and security, which continues to this day and often goes under the radar, although I am sure committee members work on this issue more than others do. That is where we see the importance of our organisation and campaign.

Let us look at the figures that have come out over the 50 years of civil war, between the 1960s and 2016 when the recent peace agreement was signed between the Colombian state and the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC. These figures, which pertain in particular between the 1980s to 2016, come from the recent truth commission report that was released. Of a population of 40 million, approximately 8 million people were forcibly displaced from their lands, more than 120,000 people disappeared, with that figure potentially being as high as 210,000, and 440,000 people were killed. We know that 6,400 civilians were killed by the army during the so-called false positives scandal particularly in the early 2000s, and we have recently seen from the findings of the transitional justice courts that more than 5,000 members and supporters of the Patriotic Union political party, which was formed after the peace process in 1980s, were killed. In addition, more than 3,200 trade unionists were killed in the 1970s; over a period of five decades, that amounts to five every month on average. Figures often take away the human side of it but they are important to emphasise the catastrophic scale of the violence, insecurity, and human rights problems in Colombia. That is why, as I am sure everyone here was positive about, there was a lot of hope around the peace process and peace agreement that was signed in 2016.

Justice for Colombia works closely with human rights and peace groups as well as pro-peace politicians in Colombia. We were very positive about the agreement that was eventually signed, particularly because it looked at some of the social and political issues that lay behind the conflict and violence. It contained chapters that looked at land issues, how to tackle the drugs issues not only with a militarised approach but with consideration of the social and economic reasons behind the farmers growing coca leaf, looking at increasing political participation, as well as re-incorporation of former combatants, and ensuring the rights of victims are respected.

Following the signing of the agreement, there have been some key advances to date, and it is important that we emphasise those and continue to show the positives brought by the agreement. Let us not forget the importance of ending an armed conflict that existed for 50 years between the FARC, which had between 13,000 and 14,000 combatants, and the state. Many thousands of lives were saved as a result of the cease-fires and the eventual laying down of weapons. There was the formation of the FARC as a political party, entering into a democratic sphere, and the creation of these transitional justice mechanisms, which have been successful in getting to the truth and moving towards some form of respect for the victims, much more than had previously been the case in the normal justice system. There was also the recent report from the truth commission. We should celebrate all these things and support these institutions that were created as part of the peace agreement. It is important for Justice for Colombia to carry on supporting it internationally.

Sadly, there is the other side. People with whom we work in Colombia continue to have concerns about the slow advance of the implementation process. In Colombia, we have heard there are big question marks around the commitment of the previous government to the implementation process, particularly in areas of rural reform, such a key area in the conflict, on which we saw minimal advancement. In terms of the land needed for sustainable, long-term economic projects for former combatants, there has been little advancement in that regard and in giving access to lands. On the importance of alternative economic projects for former coca growers who were agreeing to the manual substitution programmes, few of them have been given access to long-term economic alternatives, which is fundamental to that part of the agreement being sustainable. There are also the ongoing security issues, which I will talk about later, that affect former combatants in respect of the peace agreement, and that has been concerning. During a recent delegation visit, we met with many former combatants and spoke to some who were living in tents because the lack of security meant they had to move from where they had been previously living. This is a concerning situation and occurred in an area called El Doncello.

There have been some advances but big concerns remain but the peace process continues to survive in spite of those difficulties over recent years. That is a strength and it shows that there was something solid in what was created and agreed in 2016. International support has been important. The Irish Embassy in Colombia has been an important actor in maintaining international diplomatic support for the peace process and will, no doubt, continue to have an important role to play in that regard.

Where are we at today? As well as the difficulty with the peace process over recent years, we have also seen an increase in violence and insecurity for rural communities. Illegal armed groups have been forming in areas formally controlled by the FARC, which has provided a platform for increased violence against community activists. I am sure members of the committee will know some of the horrifying figures of recent years. From 2016, when the deal was signed, to today, more than 1,300 community activists have been killed according to Instituto de Estudios para el Desarrollo y la Paz, INDEPAZ, an organisation in Colombia. Some 137 community activists were killed this year and, as I said earlier, more than 340 former combatants have been killed, 34 of whom were killed this year.

This year, we have seen some serious human rights abuses by state actors, not least of which occurred in the southern department of Putumayo. During Justice for Colombia's latest delegation visit, we met with family members of victims. They told us there were attacked by the army and 11 people were killed. This incident was awaiting investigation by the authorities under the then Colombian Government. The government completely defended the army's action, which went against what the local community said had happened.

I am sure we all saw the protests in April and May of last year. There was a huge mobilisation on the street against tax reform as well as against the lack of implementation of the peace agreement, the problems of violence in the countryside and the response from the police. Human rights organisations reported on the horrifying things that were happening on the streets. We all saw the videos of police shooting at protestors in the streets. According to human rights organisations, 44 people were killed by the police. More than 100 people were shot in the face, mostly with gas canisters, and many of whom lost their vision. They were mostly young kids protesting on the streets. There were also reports of 26 sexual assaults by the security forces.

This has been happening in recent years and is of huge concern to us. The peace process and some of the issues coming up on the streets were part of the context that led to a change in electoral results. From our analysis, it may be what led to the shift in opinion in Colombian society and the election of a government representing voices that may not have been represented by those in power previously.

I think everyone accepts this is probably the first so-called progressive government in Colombia. It is certainly a government that talks openly and determinedly about supporting peace and human rights. There is a coalition in the Congress of Colombia that brings together this progressive coalition with some of the traditional parties, including the Conservative Party and Liberal Party, both of which have ministerial posts in the government.

To bring us up to date, for us as an organisation campaigning on peace and human rights, one of the policies giving us a great deal of hope is the new Colombian Government's flagship policy, which it is calling the policy towards total peace. This is its effort to bring an end to or take great strides towards ending the armed violence that has existed in Colombia for so long. This is focused first on the full commitment to implementation of the 2016 peace agreement and then on opening talks with all the remaining armed groups. These can be grouped into three main organisations. The first is the Ejército de Liberación Nacional, ELN, which is the largest remaining guerrilla organisation. The second consists of the so-called FARC dissident groups. These are made up of those who did not join the peace talks at the beginning or former FARC members who then created groups. It must be remembered that only a small percentage of combatants left the peace process. Some 95% of the combatants that entered the peace agreement are still in that process. The third group consists of neo-paramilitary organisations and those engaging in organised crime, including perhaps drug trafficking.

Efforts are ongoing to open talks with all these armed groups. Unilateral ceasefires have already been announced by ten armed groups, and more than 20 armed groups have declared their interest in forming part of these talks. Some very positive strides have already been taken. The high commissioner for peace, Danilo Rueda, a long-time human rights defender, is doing a great deal of work on this. This is an important opportunity for all of us to get behind something that could achieve great steps in the years ahead.

The passage of different social and political reforms through the Colombian Congress is also being sought. These include measures on police reform and increasing the state's civilian presence in rural areas. The determination to focus on the rural chapter of the peace agreement of 2016 will be extremely important. Hopefully, big strides can be made in this area. Transforming social conditions in the countryside is fundamental for everything else. A recent agreement was reached between the Colombian Government and the cattle ranchers federation, Fedegan, which traditionally was more allied to the right-wing parties in Colombia. Having this current administration strike an agreement with Fedegan for the purchase of 3 million ha of land to go into a land fund to give to peasant and small-scale farmers, as promised in the peace agreement, is another positive step.

This is where things stand. The international community's continuing interest in Colombia, and some of the key issues we will be working on, will focus on the 2016 peace agreement, support for the efforts to bring all armed actors to the table and support for the reforms to tackle historical human rights abuses within state institutions. For us, it will also be important to continue to work with and to highlight issues affecting local communities because we know the security situation is not going to improve from one day to the next. The policy of total peace is at the top of all of this and, hopefully, the international community can get behind it and find ways to support it.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Dodwell for that very interesting overview of the current situation in Colombia. I assume because it is early days for this new regime that it is probably too early to form any firm conclusions. Mr. Dodwell appears to be reasonably positive in his disposition and I am sure we can explore that further by way of questions. Mr. Finn is not minded to contribute at this point. I call Deputy Brady.

Deputy John Brady

I thank Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Finn for their insightful opening statement. It is much appreciated. I was part of the delegation that Justice for Colombia organised in May 2022. It was an insightful experience, particularly as the timing of the delegation's travel coincided with the first round of the presidential elections in Colombia. We were able to get a bird's eye view of the entire process. We got to see how security was provided and the electoral process was overseen. It was fascinating to see inside one of the largest polling stations in Bogota, to say the least. Given all the concerns expressed at the time regarding allegations of fraud and security issues, it was great to get those insights. It was also great to see the hope that many people had concerning the election. It transpired that Gustavo Petro won the second round and became the new President of Colombia.

The overall experience of the delegation was fascinating and very useful. We met human rights activists, trade unionists and people in Putumayo, where a massacre had been carried out by the military some months previously. We got to speak to many of the family members, survivors and people who had been seriously injured. It was insightful to see the attempts that were made to cover up that massacre and how this all fitted into the policy of the false positives that we had, unfortunately, seen existing for many years. I would like to try to get an understanding of how things have changed for the better, albeit only 100-odd days after the new government has been in place in Colombia. It would be good to learn what kind of inroads have been made. I know some new key ministers have been appointed. Some respectable and reputable people have taken these posts, including Gloria Inés Ramírez, a women's rights activist, who has taken over as the new Minister of Labour, and the new high commissioner for peace. I would like to get a little insight into what new legislation is being considered. Does Mr. Dodwell or Mr. Finn have any information on the legislative work done so far?

Returning to the massacre at Putumayo, I made a commitment to the families and survivors to raise this matter at every opportunity I got. Are there any updates on the investigation? Shortly after the massacre, then President Duque congratulated the army and stood over the military operation before any investigation had been carried out. I would like to know if there are any further insights or updates concerning the massacre.

The total peace policy is instrumental and key. I welcome some of the most recent progress made in restarting the faltered peace talks with the ELN. I ask Mr. Dodwell or Mr. Finn for a little more insight in this regard. Mr. Dodwell said ten other armed groups have announced ceasefires to date. Perhaps he might give a little background concerning the international backers, the pen holders, involved in those processes. What international support is there for them? How crucial is international support in ensuring the momentum behind this process does not falter as it did following the 2016 process? What role can Ireland play in this process, especially given that we have a seat on the UN Security Council, even only for a short time? What can Ireland and the Government do to support the transition to a new peaceful era in Colombia? What can we do to support the peace process?

I will make a final point. I hope this committee will send a delegation to Colombia in the near future. That would be really useful. Some committee members such as Deputy Gannon and I have been very vocal on the abuses and violations going on at the Cerrejón mine, and on the fact that Ireland is importing coal again from that particular mine. Can Mr. Dodwell recommend any useful organisations, groups or meetings that this committee or a delegation from this committee might find useful in our travels to Colombia? I think that is it for now, although I might have some supplementary questions later if we have time.

Chairman

If we have time I would be happy to call the Deputy. I will take a number of questions from various members and will then revert back to Mr. Dodwell.

Deputy Gary Gannon

I thank our contributors today from Justice for Colombia. I will get down to the brass tacks of the issues impacting Colombia. President Petro has made some recent statements in relation to the drugs trade and its impact on Colombia. Can Mr. Dodwell go into some of the international complicity in terms of the drugs trade? When you are in Colombia, you cannot help but notice that many of Colombia's problems are ones that are forced on them by the international community. Will Mr. Dodwell talk to the committee about the new Colombian President, the international drug trade and its responsibility for what is happening in Colombia?

Deputy Brady mentioned the Cerrejón mine which we have all taken an interest in, although there are other mines in Colombia as well. Colombia's climate action plans for 2030 are very ambitions. What types of climate transitions has Mr. Dodwell noticed are in place? I am very conscious of what will replace these mines when they close as they should. The mine I am familiar with, the Cerrejón mine, is a big gaping hole in the middle of the ground that has engulfed the communities around it and caused child malnutrition for their inhabitants. What sort of transitional justice and reparations should those communities expect? What are the international obligations on those of us who have taken from that mine, in terms of putting something back after it is gone, be it resources or any sort of support?

When the peace plan come in six years ago, I noticed that groups like FARC could choose settlements which involved getting a form of stipend that I believe was approximately €800 per person. It was never really factored in that once the peace happened, those groups would start having children, as people tend to do. They have not been given any other form of payment to compensate for the fact that they now have families that are growing. There is a level of enforced poverty happening there that threatens the peace. Can we take a bit more of an interest in that? What can we do in terms of encouraging the peace process and those agreements made six years ago, which probably have to be built on due to unforeseen things? What can we learn from the truth and justice programmes that are happening in Colombia? It is a country of 70 million people. It has a very ambitious peace programme and has just released the truth commission report. I am very conscious we have not done anything to that scale for our own conflict. What lessons can we learn from Colombia in relation to how they have undertaken their peace programmes?

I would like to comment on the gender-related aspects of the peace process. There is much talk about restorative justice in relation to murder. Are sexual assault crimes against women factored into the peace process? The indigenous courts are hugely important in Colombia and should be protected at all costs, but some members of the indigenous community feel that the gendered nature of the courts acts against women there. Can Mr. Dodwell comment on that, especially in relation to sexual abuse crimes?

Following on from Deputy Brady's comment, there may be a delegation from this committee going to Colombia. I do not want anyone from this committee going on a trip to beautiful Colombia like something from a sunny brochure. There are so many parts of it. If a delegation goes to Colombia, what does Mr. Dodwell think we should see?

Chairman

Many questions have been asked by Deputies Brady and Gannon. I will go back to Mr. Dodwell at this stage.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

So many questions have been asked that I have gotten lost in all of them.

Chairman

It is hard to know where to start.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

A question was asked about the new legislation and what has happened over recent months. The first thing to say is that it has literally been two and a half months. Some things have already started to move through the Colombian Congress. It is a presidential system. The Colombian Government can present items but then they have to pass through the Colombian Congress. As we highlighted in the briefing we sent out, they have a large majority at the moment. One thing has gone through in terms of environmental issues. As well as focusing on promoting peace, the other big headline for the new Colombian Government is a focus on environmental protection. A regional agreement, the Escazú Agreement, which provides environmental protections and has been promoted by environmental groups for a long time, had stalled in recent years in Colombia but has been immediately passed in the new Colombian Congress. That is something to celebrate in terms of environmental issues.

Police and political reforms are being presented and will go through several stages in the Colombian Congress. Women's issues, which were mentioned by Deputy Gannon, are among the various issues being considered as part of political reform. An effort is being made to find ways to enshrine in Colombian legislation a 50:50 representation of men and women in the Colombian Parliament.

I have not seen the actual details of the proposed political reform which has been presented by Senator María José Pizarro, who visited Dublin a couple of weeks ago. There is certainly talk of moving the police away from the jurisdiction of the Colombian ministry of defence to a civilian ministry. This is important and has been long-demanded by the human rights community. There was talk previously of involving the interior ministry, although this has not happened yet so there must still be discussion around it. There was also talk of creating a new ministry which the police would fit into. This is a significant aspect of police and political reform.

I mentioned the Escazú Agreement on the environmental side. The first important political reform action to be taken by the Colombian Government through the minister of defence was the removal of 15 generals who had links to human rights abuses. This was part of shifting the army to make it ready to be an army for peace and to follow through on the total peace plan of the Colombian Government. That was a significant move. The Colombian Government suspended aerial bombardments of camps of armed groups where they had intelligence that there were minors there. In one specific case during the period of Iván Duque - I cannot remember who the minister of defence was at the time - a camp was bombed and several children were killed. That led to a big debate in Colombia on whether those children were legitimate targets because they were in a military group, or victims of forced recruitment. Many people felt that if the Colombian state had intelligence that minors were present, they should not be carrying out bombing exercises but should be reaching out to try to get in touch with kids who are forcibly recruited. That was another significant win for some of the human rights organisations which had been calling for that.

The riot police, which are called ESMAD in Columbia, have been the police force most responsible for some of the human rights abuses on the streets particularly, but not only, during protests. Although the Colombian Government is still looking at broader police reform, a new code of conduct has already been put out which says that the riot police will now only be used as an absolute last resort rather than a first resort during protests. These are all significant material changes to go beyond the words we have heard in support of human rights and peace.

I do not have any further information on the investigation into the massacre in de Manso in Putumayo, but I will follow up on it, try to find out and get back in touch.

It is good for us to know but also, having visited, we owe it to that community to do that.

On the Ejército de Liberación Nacional, ELN, peace talks, there are not details about what will happen in terms of those talks apart from that they will start in November. In early November, we are due to have the official opening of those talks. The Colombian Government recently said it is continuing from what had already been negotiated and spoken about thus far. The negotiations started under President Santos, went into the beginnings of the period of Duque, then were suspended and have been suspended since then. The first point is that they are continuing with what had already been achieved so far but we all are awaiting further details to come. There have been a lot of initial conversations in Havana, which is where the talks are taking place. Venezuela, Cuba and Norway are the guarantor countries, but Maduro certainly with a guarantor role, for those talks.

In terms of the broader negotiations, or broader talks and spaces for openings of peace with different armed groups, the High Commissioner for Peace has had several meetings with these armed groups. When we talk about 22 armed groups, that is 22 groups that have put out statements saying that they are open to this proposal of total peace. They themselves have put out these statements with ten of those also calling a unilateral ceasefire. It is early days but initial indications from what I am reading and information I am receiving is that they are being respected. We cannot really go around talking about this because it is only significant over a longer period of time but there are words coming out of some initial indications of reduced levels of violence in these areas. We need to wait a little longer to review that.

Significantly, in terms of the organisations that have said that they are open to this process and looking at ceasefires, the biggest ones are there. Obviously, we have the ELN in talks, but also the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC, dissident groups or, as some people say in Colombia, the so-called "FARC" dissident groups. They have said that they are open to the talks. The largest so-called neo-paramilitary group - people call it by different names - or criminal structure, the Autodefensas Gaitanistas de Colombia, AGC, probably the group with the broadest presence across Colombia, has also said that it is open to talks. This is extremely positive.

In terms of roles of the international community, for example, the meeting recently with one of the FARC dissident groups was accompanied by the UN mission, by Cuba and Norway on the request of the Colombian Government.

If we look at Ireland, no doubt there is an important role to be had. As I said before, it was mentioned on many occasions to me by people working around the peace process the important role the Irish Embassy had in keeping diplomatic attention on the implementation of the 2016 peace agreement. I would say this needs to continue.

What might be in danger now is that attention gets lost with these new peace processes but it is really important that we keep focus as well on the 2016 agreement. That has a broad set of chapters that need to be implemented and that would provide massive transformation to Colombia. Keeping that focus on the 2016 is important, as well as looking at ways to support these new talks because there will be difficult moments. Talks to go through with a guerrilla force bring all their complications and having to sell that then to Colombian society is obviously a big piece of work that happens with any peace process. With other armed groups that maybe did not enter into the process or left the peace process, that brings other conversations that needed to be had and other sensibilities. No doubt these are issues that the Irish diplomatic community can have an important role in. Equally, some people might not like the idea of talks with what they might consider less political groups and more criminal groups. What I have heard about talks with the latter so far is that they should be understood differently. They will be looked at not as political negotiations as such but rather as talks about how to consider the concerns that they might articulate in political form but also look at a negotiation around some form of alternative justice if they lay down their weapons. All of these different moments will have considerable pressures inside Colombia of people who might not be favourable to that. All the work and support that the diplomatic community in Ireland and the Government can do is extremely welcome.

Something that might be helpful as well, particularly thinking about the UN Security Council, is the role of the UN mission. Obviously, the UN mission was created at different stages. The mandate was changed at different stages, most recently to also cover some of the monitoring of the sentences that might be given out now by the transitional justice courts. It could be interesting to look at what role a UN mission might have in this new era of total peace or efforts towards total peace in these new peace processes. Anyone involved in the peace process of 2016 knows how important the UN mission has been. It would be really interesting to look at whether there is pressure for or a voice needing to be given to amplifying the role of a UN mission for these future talks.

That hopefully covers Deputy Brady's questions. I will move on to the other questions.

The speech in the UN General Assembly was very interesting and certainly seemed like it was communicating a message that the new Government wanted to give out, particularly around the environment and drugs. He spoke about the failure of the war on drugs and how, in spite of the decades of war on drugs, there is growing consumption in consumption countries and ongoing and growing production in production countries, such as Colombia. This was a message that was repeated by Senator María José Pizarro, who we had with us on a visit very recently. The message they are wanting to put out is this drugs policy is causing violence, war and death in their country and they are providing the bodies in this war on drugs without any results, in terms of the actual stated objectives, as well as the environmental degradation, which is often a missed effect. As far as I understood, the message was: one, it is not being successful; two, it is causing them a lot of violence and death; and three, it is also causing environmental destruction in their country. There is seemingly a push coming from the Government for an international conversation around drugs and the approach to drugs internationally. While our analysis would not be that the drugs issue has been the cause of the conflict or the violence in Colombia, it has certainly been a fuel that has allowed it to continue and perhaps be more bloody than it might otherwise have been.

At the root, there is the coca farmer-grower. On a personal level, I have spent a lot of time in communities where coca farmers live. I am sure everyone here is aware of this, but these are not the people making the money out of this trade. These are incredibly poor people. If we look at a global perspective, these are very poor farmers who used to grow other crops, due to a lack of infrastructure and certain complaints about imports coming in from countries with farming subsidised, being unable to sell what they used to sell. If they grow coca, they get a guaranteed income. They can live a very basic life but they can have food on the table. It is obvious, as the peace agreement of 2016 concludes with its proposals, that there has to be a social economic answer to the growing of coca in Colombia. I and our organisation, Justice for Colombia, keep pointing to the 2016 agreement because it asks for those things to happen. Although we have had 99,000 families signed up for mutually-agreed substitution, 97% of families do not have a long-term economic alternative project. That should be happening. Hopefully, we can provide pressure to make that happen.

Deputy Gary Gannon

The coca farmers are not the ones making the money from the drug trade. Who is making the money from the drugs trade?

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

Many people are making money from the drugs trade. It is not my area of expertise to follow the trail of money, but it is certainly not the grower making the money. The money is made in the trafficking and the stages beyond that. People often say money infiltrates all levels of society. In the case of Colombia we probably all agree that it infiltrates many levels of society across the world. However, it is not my area of expertise to comment on that, I am afraid.

Deputy Gary Gannon

It is the responsibility of all of us, though, to highlight the trail of money that leads to the devastation, be it in Colombia or in working-class communities here, from the drugs trade. It is not the people, either growers in Colombia or people who are suffering from drugs in Ireland or elsewhere, who are making the money from the trade but they certainly experience the devastation. We need a mature conversation about it.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

Absolutely. In answer to the question, I think that is exactly what this new Colombian Government is trying to take a lead on.

As for environmental transition, there are big objectives. In campaigning the government has spoken about wanting to get to zero reliance on export of fossil fuels. That is the biggest part of Colombian exports and GDP at the moment, so it is a huge intention. What will replace fossil fuels? What I have heard spoken about is a desire to reinvigorate Colombia's agricultural production. The details of that I have not seen, but that is certainly at the headline level what the government wants to do. It wants to turn Colombia back into a producer of food, that is, a producing country using its agricultural potential. Again, and this was also in the UN speech, I think, if the government is to be able to respond to the environmental issue, as a country with big sections of the Amazon rainforest, there will be a lot of attention and pressure on Colombia. It will not be possible to respond to that need of Colombians and of the world without international conversations or without an international shift in energy consumption. That is the message going out. It will be interesting to see how that develops over the coming years.

There was mention of the peace process and maybe a need for increased stipends. I will just emphasise that continued attention on the peace agreement. That is certainly what we are focused on doing, and all the support we can get for that is extremely welcome.

As for the transitional justice programme, I do not feel comfortable or in a position to speak about what can be learned here from Colombia. What I can say, however, is that, while of course we have many challenges, positives have come through having the many recognitions of responsibility that former FARC commanders have made on multiple occasions, and the protests have led to several members of the military taking responsibility for their actions in the false positives killings I spoke about earlier. I spoke to some of the victims, and that process is really important to them. Those might be just anecdotal things, but we know that is important on a broader scale as well. What is important now in that sense is that we will start to see sentences for different crimes come out for the FARC and for the state, so internationally it is important we are ready to respond in the way we want to respond. It is to be hoped it will continue in the way that seems correct for the peace process and for the advancement of Colombia to respond in a way to support these decisions and how transitional justice is operating. It will probably face a big backlash in Colombia, where the decisions go more one way or more another way. It is important that our attention is on these decisions as they come out over the next few months.

Deputy Gannon mentioned women's issues and indigenous issues inside the peace process. As with many elements of the peace process, recent years have been pretty tragic in terms of the potential and the hope that was there and how much it has advanced. Among the issues that did not advance are what are called the instantes, the specific committees that were supposed to be set up to follow the implementation to make sure that it was keeping a focus on indigenous communities, Afro-Colombian communities and women communities. Now those committees are being reinitiated and given a new lease of life. It is early days, but we are, I think, in a position where we can be more hopeful.

To respond to the Chairman's comment about my optimism in this way, let us see what happens. However, as for the proposals that are coming out and the language being used, these are the same as the things that human rights organisations and peace organisations have been asking for in recent years, so that is a good reason for us to be hopeful but also to keep our attention and maintain our pressure.

Chairman

Thank you, Mr. Dodwell. That is very useful.

Deputy John Brady

I do not expect the witnesses to have all the names or groups, but Deputy Gannon and I asked what useful engagement a delegation from the committee could have if it were to go to Colombia.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

I have no doubt the organisers will be organising very important meetings. From a Justice for Colombia perspective, and thinking about peace and human rights, maybe the committee might see things it would not otherwise see. It is very important to meet with the newly appointed high commissioner for peace, Danilo Rueda. There is also a peace commission in the Colombian House and Senate, so it would be good to get the view of what is happening with that total peace policy, what is the plan and how far it has advanced. Those would be key groups and people to meet with.

As for the 2016 agreement and the need to continue to focus on that, lest we forget about it as an international community, it would be important to meet with the representatives of what is called the CSIVI, the committee for oversight of implementation. It had really run dry over recent years. Again, that has been reinitiated in recent weeks and will start meeting again. There are representatives on that body from the FARC, or what is now called the Comunes political party, and the Colombian Government. It would be really important to meet with representatives of the Comunes. I am sure the committee will meet with representatives of the government in other guises as well, but it would definitely be important to meet with members of Comunes as one of the two sides to that peace process.

More broadly, as to where to go and not wanting to see only the nice parts and hotels of Bogotá, there are two aspects to this. One is the importance, if possible and if time allows, for the committee to try to get to a reincorporation zone or FARC reincorporation camp. These have two forms. There are the official ones that were created under the peace agreement and then a number have been created in an ad hoc way. There are 75 in total. The vast majority, 10,000, of the more than 13,000 former combatants live outside of the official zones now, many in those newly created areas. Whether one of the official zones or the newly created areas, it would be really important, if possible, to go and see how the rank-and-file former combatants are existing at the moment and what their needs are in respect of the successful implementation of the agreement.

The other side to the rural areas is to go and see areas where there are particular problems with human rights issues and security issues. These killings are taking place in very specific regions in the countryside. For example, the committee could go to Putumayo or to Cauca and meet with human rights organisations there. A good organisation I would recommend meeting in those areas, one that has local groups, is the agricultural workers' union, FENSUAGRO. Maybe the committee could make a visit to Putumayo and have some follow-up on what is happening with the families of Remanso. That could be very interesting for the committee.

Finally, there is the issue of human rights and the protests. It is important to follow up on that from what happened in 2021. One organisation in that regard that would be key is the human rights network, Francisco Isaías Cifuentes, in Cali, which is doing a lot of work with some of the young people who have been in prison since then. It has a campaign to try to accompany them and make sure that any illegalities in their arrests and imprisonment do not continue to keep them in prison.

The committee will probably meet some of those groups at any rate, for example, the peace commissioner, the House and Senate and, I hope, the Comunes. If Justice for Colombia can assist with anything, particularly in respect of the rural areas, the FARC former combatant camps, the human rights organisations in Cali or the agricultural workers' union in Putumayo, we would be very happy to do so.

Senator Joe O'Reilly

I welcome our two guests from Justice for Colombia. On a personal level I appreciate the interaction with Mr. Finn over recent months with us. He is very helpful and informative. I had occasion to speak with him several times as I have a real interest in this issue, which I think is shared by everyone in the room. I appreciate his interaction and his willingness to help and to inform, and his courtesy.

I am pleased that Ireland has a high profile here and that Colombia is high on the committee’s agenda. It is a priority for the Chair. I am pleased that delegates from this committee will travel to Colombia. That is important in order to keep the link. I am pleased that our Garda Síochána and Teagasc have a role. There are many forms of co-operation. It is wonderful that since 2016 as a country we have contributed roughly €17 million to support the peace process.

I am also proud that a distinguished predecessor of the Chair as Minister for Foreign Affairs, Eamon Gilmore, who has been a friend of mine since my youth and indeed a friend of our Chair’s since his youth, which is not that long ago, had a pivotal role in Colombia and I am proud of that as a fellow Member of the Oireachtas. He did great work on this issue that the witnesses will acknowledge.

I will make some comments and ask some questions. There is inevitably an overlap because, unfortunately, the themes are similar. In the briefing material and the documentation from the witnesses there is a great deal to be hopeful about on a number of fronts. It is interesting that the president has admitted the failure of the war on drugs. How do the witnesses see that? What do they anticipate the learning from that failure will be? What will be done there in future? To admit failure is a start.

In regard to the effort by the Colombian Government to be inclusive and to have what it calls a total peace, as it is described here, will the witnesses comment on the progress on that? It is important that it is going to be inclusive. I would be interested in the groupings being brought in, if the witnesses will elaborate on that. Related to that, on the negative side, the number of killings this year was 144 and 13,071 since the signing of the peace agreement. These are stark figures. What do the witnesses think about the total peace initiative and what might come out of the talks? Again, I would be interested in the widening of the groups. A total of 22 illegal armed groups have said they are willing to enter the peace process as well as the FARC dissident group, which is hugely significant. I am sure the witnesses would agree but do they see that actually succeeding? What do they envisage happening? The UN Secretary General's response to the new government seems positive.

The land reform is interesting along with the new pledge on rural reform and crop substitution. Will Mr. Dodwell elaborate on rural reform? That was always part of the Irish independence story as well. Will he also comment on the efforts to locate disappeared people as part of the evolution of the truth commission. What is the affect of that? How successful is it? My interpretation of the briefing material and documentation is that there is a mixture of hope and a certain level of a stark background. I appreciate that is the case, from the committee's point of view, and feel this should remain a high priority issue on our agenda this term.

Deputy David Stanton

I welcome Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Finn and thank them for their comprehensive report. It is an interesting contribution. Many of the questions I was going to put have been asked so I will not cover those again, except one or two. Mr. Dodwell mentioned 8 million internally displaced persons, IDPs. Will he comment on that and tell us more about the situation? There are also 1.8 million refugees or displaced persons from Venezuela in Colombia. Will he tell us about the impact that is having? Relations between the two countries have resumed again. Will he give his thoughts on that? I would also be interested to know the impact of Covid-19 and the ongoing impact of it in Colombia. Economics plays a huge part in everything we do all over the world. What is the employment rate, especially for young people? Has he any views on that? He mentioned the human rights protests, and that health formed a big part. Are there any movements to improve the situation in the health service? Deforestation and the economic future of farmers have been covered. He said 97% do not have a long-term economic alternative project, which is quite worrying.

Deputy Barry Cowen

I acknowledge the gentlemen and their group for the presentation they have made. It was succinct and up to date. I welcome the fact that when mentioning those initiatives that remain outstanding, untouched or unmoved in the peace agreement and the commitments that have been made but have not yet been responded to in the way one would have expected, it is good to hear that the new administration is making the right soundings. Whether that can translate into the right impact and the right initiatives remains to be seen. The witnesses have responded to a fair number of detailed questions, which is appreciated. We in this committee look forward to visiting Colombia, building on they have said and seeking responses from relevant authorities on the outstanding items that have not been progressed in the manner wished for. It is important to know and to see what exactly is contained the programme for government of the new administration in regard to how it plans to deal with those outstanding items referred to. It is great and yet grave at the same time. We are proud of the committee, the Government and other Oireachtas Members to whom Senator O'Reilly referred who have built on the experience we have in this country regarding conflict resolution, notwithstanding the fact that items are outstanding there but not to the same grave extent as remains the case in Colombia. I hope we can both learn from our experiences and assist one another in ensuring that progress is made in both jurisdictions. We look forward to that and to the engagement of the committee. We can touch base again upon the committee's return to share information in order to see what can be done to progress matters in the future.

Chairman

I thank Deputy Cowen. Before calling Mr. Dodwell to reply to the number of questions and indeed not to be repetitive, I would like to underline what Senator O'Reilly said about the priority that the committee has placed over several years on the Colombian peace process. The opening of an Irish Embassy in Bogota in 2019 and the resident Colombian ambassadorial office in Dublin since 2018 have been important in intensifying and deepening the bilateral relationship.

I acknowledge the work of the ambassador, H.E. Patricia Cortés Ortiz here in Dublin. At every level, she ensures this committee is fully briefed and that civil society in Ireland is engaged in what is an important peace process for us. This is not something new, as Senator Joe O'Reilly has said. This committee prioritised relations between Ireland and Colombia during the administration of President Santos. That continued under the regime of President Duque and it will continue under the new administration of President Petro. In fact, reading the speech given by the President at his inauguration, he seemed to be very strong on what he described as a "second opportunity" for Colombia. He said people have earned this and he was going to prioritise it.

Is the level of optimism contained in the President's inauguration day speech still evident in Colombia now? He spoke of a new hope. Mr. Dodwell said the peace process has survived, as though that in itself was an important aspect of current deliberations in Colombia. In his speech, President Petro referred to the importance of social dialogue in every corner of the country. He stressed that he was to be the President of all of Colombia. He also said that the absence of the state hurts in many parts of Colombia. Is there evidence to endorse what he said in his address? What steps have been taken so far to ensure Colombia does not have no-go areas? This aspect seems to be suggested in the contents of President Petro's early speech.

Turning to what Senator Joe O'Reilly mentioned regarding the search unit for missing persons and victims of enforced disappearances, is there evidence of engagement by victims and victims' groups to ensure confidence in the institutions set up? Some of these have existed for some time. I was pleased to note that over the years, and the last five or six years in particular, Ireland has been closely associated with EU initiatives regarding assistance and support for Colombia, with particular reference to the trust fund. Ireland has contributed some €17 million to it. Does Mr. Dodwell still have confidence in the continuation of that level of EU support that we saw some years ago? Deputy Stanton referred to refugees. Perhaps Mr. Dodwell might give us a brief outline of the impact of the refugee situation, especially regarding those from Venezuela. I refer to the impact this situation has had on the challenge of economic development or economic confidence in the context of the new regime.

I thank Mr. Dodwell not only for his engagement with us but for his broader engagement here across civil society and in Britain. He is raising awareness and ensuring that we are not only apprised of the situation in Colombia but are in a position to act in the manner he described earlier while replying to Deputy Brady. I thank Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Finn for being here. I will leave them with those few questions.

Mr. Hasan Dodwell

I thank the Chair. I recognise and respect the work done here to support peace and human rights in Colombia. I follow this closely and I am aware of how many of the members are focused and committed to the issue. This is obviously felt in Colombia. Certainly, the people we work with know about this aspect. Mention was also made of the embassies. We have worked closely and regularly with the Colombian Embassy here, as well as the Irish Embassy in Bogotá. This is an important relationship for us.

Regarding optimism and whether this is evident in Colombia, this is a broad question. One aspect is that the election of President Petro is a shift from normal electoral culture in Colombia and a sign that people wanted to try something new. The existence now of such a broad coalition also shows this shift may extend beyond just the voting base of President Petro and that there is a coming together behind his vision, and not just his vision but that of his government, including Vice President Francia Márquez, and many others. It indicates that this is a time to put a big effort into trying something serious in achieving peace. Many people on the Colombian congressional level, certainly, are behind this effort. It also seems to be attracting much support on a societal level now. Undoubtedly, the effort being made is also recognised within the human rights and peace organisations. It is early days and let us see what happens but I think this optimism is present now. No one, however, is ignorant of the challenges. Many parts of the country - one third is a rough estimate - have no or very little state presence. The state is almost absent and these are the areas where the violence is most predominantly taking place. I am trying to take the queries in order.

Senator Joe O'Reilly referred to there still being hope and worry. No one is unaware of this. Everything being done takes this into consideration. Killings of community activists are still continuing. This is tragic. Justice for Colombia continually raises the voices of those communities to try to increase their protection. We know things are not going to change from one day to the next. We must be aware and prepared for this situation, therefore, while supporting the positive steps being taken.

Moving to the war on drugs, this was also mentioned earlier and I referred to some of the points in this regard a moment ago when responding to Deputy Gannon. On what happens now, as I said, many of the steps needed were contained in the 2016 peace agreement in a chapter on drugs and illicit crops. It has not been implemented as much as it might have been. This does not mean, however, that there is not plenty there to work with. The key element to this, in broad terms, was ending the militarised approach to coca farmers and the growing of the coca crop. I refer to the plant itself. The key initiative here is ending the militarised and criminalised approach towards the coca farmers and recognising the socioeconomic factors at work. This is the core of an alternative and more successful policy on drugs. It would be one which would listen to and follow what the communities themselves are saying, as well as what those working on Colombia concerning these issues are saying.

There is, though, a big "but" here, and this is partly what the Colombian Government is trying to communicate. Changing the policy in Colombia alone is not going to be enough. The question of "what now", therefore, is also about what happens now in the international community and its approach towards the war on drugs and drugs policies. In this context, the question is what changes might be made to assist producer countries to ensure the relationship between drugs and violence comes to an end.

On total peace, some of the information is in the briefing. Mention was already made of the initial talks the high commissioner for peace has been having with different armed groups. A process has been initiated with the ELN, the largest guerrilla group and talks will start at the beginning of November. These will continue from what had previously been negotiated under the Santos Government and during the initial stages of the Duque Government.

The idea of how these talks will continue and exactly what they will look like is still very much to be defined. However, so far, the Government has put out a call to say this is what it wants to do. Many of the armed groups have responded to say they are open to it, they are listening and suggest talking. As I said previously, several ceasefires have already been declared and let us measure this over the next couple of months. There is an initial indication, however, that we may already be starting to see something positive from that. Again, that is not to underplay the ongoing killings that are still happening and the tragedy of that. That is where we are at. We are in very early days, the feelers have been put out, there has been a positive response and the work is ongoing in that realm.

It is important to add that what is now happening at the same time, this is part of the vision of what I am seeing from the new Government, is the holding of mass regional meetings with local communities, particularly in the areas that are most affected by conflict. That is to feed into any peace talks with armed groups in order that they are also directly involved in those talks and in what comes out of them. It is also more broadly part of the production and writing of what is called in Colombia the national development plan, which is the overall framework for the four years of the government and of what they will do. They are having mass consultations across the country to feed into that. That is something that Senator María José Pizarro Rodríguez spoke about when she was over recently. That is part of what is happening in terms of the total peace plan. What is happening more broadly touches on the point the Chair raised about the reaching out to these no-go zones and areas and hidden corners in order that there is social dialogue in every corner. This is starting to materialise in practice. These meetings are starting to be set up with different state authorities there and with local groups. Of course, as I keep saying, we are in an initial moment and let us see what happens.

The Senator mentioned possible collaborations and support. Certainly, what we would like to work on after this is to look at proposing and trying to get adhesion to a big statement in support of some of the positive elements that we are seeing around peace and the total peace plan. If that is something that might be agreeable to members here that would be fantastic. Hopefully, we can try to promote actions that show international support for any positive steps that come. Hopefully, Mr. Finn and I will be in touch about that.

On the subject of rural reform, one issue is the declaration from the government that that is its absolute priority in terms of its focus on the implementation of the 2016 agreement and recognising that this is the front and centre issue that has to be advanced. The agreement to purchase 3 million ha of land from the cattle ranchers' federation is a positive step. It has already started making moves to set up the agrarian jurisdiction or to reinvigorate that. It has announced that it will continue with some of the things that had already been developing in terms of what are called the Programas de Desarrollo con Enfoque Territorial, PDETs, that is, the specialised rural development plans for the most problematic regions. There are therefore new words and now we are starting to see some actions to focus on that rural reform issue.

The search for the disappeared unit is a part of the transitional justice mechanisms that may be less spoken about than the other two but as members will have hopefully seen in our briefing, it has made some really important material advances to connect families with stories and the bodies of their loved ones and even with connecting people with loved ones who were still alive. Their work has uncovered some mass graves. The task is mammoth in Colombia. As we said, there are 120,000, according to the truth commission, or maybe up to 210,000 people who have been disappeared. At the current rate, it would be approximately another 78 years for them to be able to have had some sort of a lead on all of the different cases. That is a huge task but it does not undermine what has already been achieved there.

In terms of displacement, obviously in terms of the historic displacement in Colombia, for a long time it was the highest and second-highest country for internal displacement in the world. It still continues, sadly. I do not have the figures to hand but I can send them over after this meeting. There are, however, still thousands of people and many families who are forced to flee from their homes every single year in Colombia as a result of this lack of security and lack of civilian state presence in the rural areas. That is tragic and that is why the focus on getting security and civilian state presence and negotiating with these armed groups is so fundamental.

A couple of members mentioned the influx of refugees from Venezuela. Many people came over recent years into Colombia. It is now seeming to be positive, certainly on a practical level, to have diplomatic relations reopened in order that there can be conversations between the two countries and governments, when that had previously completely broken down. This is first on the question of the refugees but also on the question of insecurity because some of the armed groups are operating in those border areas and it is obviously very hard to respond to that if the governments have no relations. That was a big motivation for them both to reinitiate that diplomatic relationship. Hopefully, we can see some positive results from that in terms both of the migrants and refugees from Venezuela and of the security situation in that region.

On the issue of Covid-19 and unemployment, I am afraid that I do not have the latest figures on Covid-19. Yet, when I was following it back in the day when Covid-19 was front and centre in my mind on a day-to-day basis, it felt very similar to here in terms of numbers and impact. Hopefully, we will know all of that unless I am completely off, but it was at some point when I was looking at it. I think that is generally how it was. I think what was interesting about Covid-19 and unemployment, and those two were mentioned together probably not by chance, is that is much of the discontent, certainly of what was reported from Colombia in terms of the analyses there, concerned the shock to the system and people’s immediate lives because so many people work in the informal sector in Colombia who then could not go and work. As there was not the apparatus or the subsidies for them to have something to replace that work, poverty levels became highly problematic for people. Many people said that this is what led to the huge protests in 2021. It was that combination of Covid-19 worsening the situation and rising poverty levels. In the brief that went round, I noted the latest poverty levels that were quoted from the Colombian institution that measures them. There are sadly still very high figures. Those two issues combined to contribute to where we are at today in Colombia.

On the issue of how to respond, mention was made of elements of the peace agreement that have not been advanced as much as we might have hoped and how to respond to those. Obviously, there is the statement of intent. Two key things that have happened so far, although we could probably mention others, are the relaunching of two of the bodies that were key to the implementation of the peace agreement. The first of these is the oversight body, which is called the CSIVI in Colombia. I will not translate that because it will be meaningless in a direct translation but it is the implementation oversight body on which there are representatives from the FARC and from the government. That has now been relaunched and that is a great signal of intent. Materially, it will hopefully help with the implementation, as well as with the National Commission on Security Guarantees, which was set up as part of the peace agreement specifically to look at the insecurity in rural areas and in other parts of the country. It had been instructed to try to generate a policy to respond to the presence of illegal armed groups. It is supposed to develop a policy towards the dismantling of illegal armed groups, including paramilitary successor groups or neo-paramilitary groups.

A big demand of human rights organisations mentioned repeatedly in the UN mission report was that this had not advanced sufficiently and that it was not meeting enough. This was the place we were supposed to see a policy developed to confront these illegal armed groups that are causing such chaos in Colombia, but it has not happened. If there was a seriousness to tackle this insecurity issue, why has this not developed? It is positive that this body has also been relaunched.

There is a mention of touching base after the trip, which would be fantastic and we would love to hear what the committee members see and their conclusions from that trip. That brings me back to the Chair's comment. I tried to answer at the beginning whether that optimism is shared and, of course, many people will still need to be convinced. The election result was almost 50-50 between Gustavo Petro and Rodolfo Hernández. Many others did not vote. There is a lot of convincing to do. We want to see material change. We want to see people no longer being killed. Hopefully, we can see something along those lines that might bring more people on board. However, there is a certain level of optimism.

Regarding victims' groups gaining confidence in the institutions, the groups we work with support the peace process. They have known decades of impunity in the normal court systems towards the crimes that have been committed against them. For them, the transitional justice system offers an alternative. Despite all its imperfections, the transitional justice system is offering far more to victims than was being offered before now. There is definitely considerable trust and confidence. There will always be shortcomings, but there is certainly recognition that this is a positive step to getting victims' rights respected in Colombia. I think that responds to all the questions asked. I reiterate my thanks for the invitation to appear before the committee.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Dodwell. I found his presentation most useful. I acknowledge the direct manner in which he answered all questions and in a most comprehensive way. I also thank the wider organisation, Justice for Colombia, which plays an important role. The members of the committee look forward to continued engagement with Mr. Dodwell and his colleagues.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.43 p.m. and adjourned at 4.58 p.m. until 3.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 25 October 2022.