In Colombia, violence has been systematic since the dawn of the republic. It manifests itself with different levels of territorial intensity, originated by various perpetrators who go beyond insurgent and paramilitary groups. The presence of these groups was preceded by "bipartisan violence," which resulted in the death of thousands of people, both civilians and military, and forced displacement, throughout Colombia. It is estimated that during bipartisan violence, between 200,000 and 300,000 people lost their lives and that more than 2,000,000 (equivalent to almost one-fifth of Colombia's total population of approximately 11 million at the time) were violently dispossessed of their land and forced to migrate from the countryside to the city.

Between 1925 and 1958, (although some point to the period 1920-1960), the country was marked by a political and social conflict in the period of bipartisan violence, with armed confrontations between supporters of the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party that, without having declared a civil war, was characterized by being extremely violent with murders, aggressions, persecutions,  massacres, dispossessions and forced displacements and the increasingly inequitable concentration of land, means of production and political power.

From the mid-1960s, a new internal armed conflict began with the presence of guerrillas who proclaimed themselves on socio-political and economic structural causes, and from the mid-1980s onwards with the presence of paramilitarism as a new actor of violence with the consent of some state actors.  economic and political. In the 21st century, guerrilla warfare, the dissidents of the former FARC guerrilla and paramilitary groups that have remained under different guises, in strong relations with drug trafficking and different global multi-crime structures, exacerbate violence and break the hope of a stable and lasting peace for Colombia.

Recurrent aspects of violence have been dispossession and forced displacement throughout Colombia, which do not occur by virtue of a single pattern, nor are they derived exclusively from illegal armed actors, but rather in the ultimate goal of establishing licit and illicit economies, there has been the concurrence of various actors:  armed forces, drug trafficking, global multi-crime structures, agribusiness, mining, cattle ranching, etc.

On some occasions, in dispossession, primarily strategic military uses are merged – clearing a geographical corridor for supply, for example – with uses with a more economic profile. This would be the case of the appropriation of places where natural resources are located, the execution of macro-projects of various kinds, or even the establishment of illegal market routes associated with the smuggling of arms and drugs, and there may also be no use if the objective is to dismantle the social fabric. (IEPRI, CNRR, Memoria Histórica. 2009).

Despite failed attempts to reverse the inequality in the country's agrarian structure, exacerbated by the factors of dispossession and displacement and despite a variety of opponents, in 2011, the country took an important step forward with the Law of Victims and Land Restitution (Law 1448 of 2011), which aims to dignify, recognize, serve,  to assist and repair the survivors of events that have occurred in the armed conflict since 1985. This law establishes judicial, administrative, social and economic measures for the benefit of victims, provides, among others, for land restitution and in this context the Land Restitution Unit was created in 2012.

Restitution, provided for in Law 1448 of 2011 and in differential decree-laws 4633, 4634 and 4635 of 2011, is not simply an abbreviated process of belonging but is a specific instrument of transitional justice, which modifies many of the classic rules of civil law, by establishing, for example, presumptions of illegality of land purchases in certain areas of violence and displacement.  necessary modifications so that progress can be made in the restitution of millions of hectares of dispossessed lands. It is, therefore, important that the officials in charge of implementing restitution, that is, the field teams of the Land Restitution Unit, as well as the transitional restitution judges – who are not ordinary civil judges but true transitional judges – interpret the content and scope of this restitution process taking into account its own and specific purpose, as an instrument of transitional justice to reverse a massive dispossession of millions of hectares.

It is also essential to understand the particularity of the restitution process, which cannot and should not be interpreted as a civil judicial action for times of peace and normality, but as a special action intended to deal with an extraordinary phenomenon of violence and dispossession.

It is necessary to understand that Law 1448 of 2011 and decree laws 4633, 4634 and 4635 of 2011 have granted special powers to the transitional restitution judge, such as his power to annul sentences or administrative acts, which are not usual for a judge in normal times. Or that the law has provided for presumptions or the reversal of the burden of proof, which are not proper to the law in normal times either. This is, therefore, an expression of a transitional right especially – although not exclusively – in the civil sphere" (URT, Colombia Responde, USAID, DeJusticia. 2016. La Restitución de Tierras y Territorios). 

IN THE NEXT ARTICLE, I WILL DELVE INTO THE LAND RESTITUTION UNIT AND ITS MOST RECENT BETS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF CHANGE.