Ignorances of the New York Times

The Justice and Peace Law  is not ideal, but it is the best choice among what is now possible. Besides, it is stronger than the laws that helped guerrilleros and drug lords return to civilian life in the past.

It is very easy, but overly irresponsible to give an opinion without looking into the past and present, and without being directly involved in the issues being criticized or having lived through the ordeal of more than 50 years of violence. Nonetheless, this is exactly what The New York Times has done, in its editorial ?Colombia?s Capitulation?.

The New York newspaper ignores that the process with the self-defense groups was reached as consequence of the Government hard line of the Uribe administration, which has captured more members of the AUC than any other previous president. This administration has also seen the voluntary disarming of 12,700 combatants. 55% of these were members of the paramilitary group, and 45% belonged to the ELN and FARC guerrillas.

The paper also overlooks that there have been other negotiation processes with violent groups in the recent history of Colombia, which have offered more benefits: pardons, general amnesty, no prison, no relief, and authorization to participate in politics. Some of these cases were the M-19, EPL, CRS, and Quintín Lame.

The journal neglects that during the administration of César Gaviria there was a law called Sometimiento a la Justicia , which covered the drug lords of then. Drug lords that not only sent narcotics to the United States, but who also killed thousands of police officers and citizens, as they made the Colombian people subject to their harsh terrorist attacks.

They did not have the sword of Damocles that extradition represented, because it had been eliminated from the Constitution. They were not asked to repair the damage done to the victims nor to confess all their crimes. Confessing one of these crimes was enough. Nowadays, these narco-terrorists enjoy freedom and their assets, after having served a few years in jail.

The Justice and Peace Law is not ideal but it is not the Capitulation of Colombia. It is quite good, given the possibilities.  How can the New York Times, living in a pragmatic culture, not understand this ? The law does not include amnesty and pardon, it does not leave crimes absolutely unpunished, and it is not contrary to the Constitution. Neither it gives political rights to those covered by this law whose crimes do not include sedition, nor it eliminates the seizure of their illegally acquired assets. Besides all these, it is also the first law for violent groups that demands reparation to the victims.

The New York Times also ignored the opinions of  former U.S. President Bill Clinton, and of the U.S Ambassador to Colombia, William Wood. Clinton compared the Justice and Peace Law to the one issued in Rwanda in order to heal injuries of an 800 thousand people genocide in little more than a month, at the same time he commented that the Colombian law was more demanding.

Ambassador Wood said this law was discussed in an open and democratic debate which legitimizes its result, as it establishes a viable juridical frame. He also said that it is necessary to see it executed, before declaring it a success or a failure.

The Justice and Peace Law, we want to insist, is not a capitulation of Colombia. It is better than the law which benefited members of the M-19 guerrilla and other subversive groups. It is a law that demands much more than the law called Sometimiento a la Justicia (Subject to Justice) which covered many of the so called Medellin and Cali cartels. It is a shame that there are still so many sticks interfering on the peace building wheel of  Colombia. It is as if they wished to condemn us to a history of chaos and violence.