The Legal Status of the Colombian Peace Agreement

Restrepo, Laura

doi:10.1017/s2398772300003056

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Por sus particularidades, el proceso de paz ha estado en el centro de los debates políticos, jurídicos y académicos a nivel mundial. Aunque se ha analizado el estatus jurídico del Acuerdo de Paz (Betancur, 2016;Rojas, 2018), no hay suficientes trabajos que exploren el papel del Constitucionalismo en la consecución y protección de los Acuerdos de La Habana.…”

Section: Entre La Justicia Y La Pazunclassified

Constitucionalismo y Justicia Transicional: el proceso de paz entre Colombia y las FARC-EP

Gutiérrez-Rodríguez

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Después de varios años de conversaciones en La Habana, en noviembre de 2016 el Gobierno colombiano y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC-EP) firmaron el Acuerdo Final Para la Terminación del Conflicto y la Construcción de una Paz Estable y Duradera. Con él, pusieron fin negociadamente a más de medio siglo de confrontaciones armadas. Se trata del primer Acuerdo de Paz desarrollado enteramente bajo el examen preliminar de la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI); lo que complejizó los desarrollos normativos, pues las condiciones para finalizar el conflicto armado debían responder tanto a la situación política como a los estándares internacionales en materia de responsabilidad penal individual ratificados por Colombia. Este artículo da cuenta del papel que jugó el desarrollo constitucional en el proceso de paz; prestando atención tanto a las acciones normativas que habilitaron las conversaciones, como a los blindajes constitucionales que protegieron los acuerdos después de alcanzados.

show abstract

Section: Entre La Justicia Y La Pazunclassified

Constitucionalismo y Justicia Transicional: el proceso de paz entre Colombia y las FARC-EP

Gutiérrez-Rodríguez

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…129 Thirdly, the strategy was seen by the Colombian opposition and parts of the society as an attempt to subvert the established means of constitutional change, and judicial and democratic oversight, and as such has become one of the reasons behind the defeat of the Agreement at plebiscite. 130 Lastly, it did not meet the approval of the Constitutional Court. In upholding the law on submitting the agreement to a peace plebiscite, the Court added the proviso that the peace agreement would not be automatically included in the Constitution.…”

Section: Attributing Supra-constitutional or International Legal Stat...mentioning

confidence: 99%

(Un)constitutional change rooted in peace agreements

Ozcelik

Olcay

2020

International Journal of Constitutional Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peace agreements aiming to end intra-state armed conflicts often provide for radical constitutional change, with more than 100 peace agreements concluded since 1989 containing provisions on constitutional reform. When such constitutional change is envisaged to take place within the framework of an existing constitution, as opposed to the making of a new constitution, hard-achieved deals between peace-making parties are exposed to “the unconstitutionality challenge.” Although there is ample literature on the making of a new constitution during transitions from conflict to peace, implementing a peace agreement within an existing constitutional framework and “the unconstitutionality challenge” to peace reforms has not been fully examined to date. In this article, we first identify the modalities in which “the unconstitutionality challenge” is directed at constitutional change rooted in peace agreements. We do so through a comparative survey and by particular reference to peace processes in Colombia (with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia—People’s Army, FARC) and the Philippines (regarding the Mindanao conflict). We then examine the promise and limitations of three legal strategies in addressing the unconstitutionality challenge: (i) recourse to international law in assessing unconstitutionality, (ii) transitionalism in judicial review, and (iii) attributing supra-constitutional or international legal status to peace agreements. We conclude that while each strategy has some merit, their effectiveness may be limited where they lack legal feasibility or political purchase. The resulting intractability of the unconstitutionality challenge, particularly in jurisdictions where there is a strong commitment to legalism, warrants a rethinking of the relationship between peace-making and constitutional reform, and existing constitutional frameworks in transitional countries.

show abstract

“…The Agreement itself is explicitly stated to be an agreement under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, 1949. 17 This move is not without international precedent: an agreement in Aceh was similarly stated to be a Special Agreement for the purposes of humanitarian law, and the Guatemalan Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights (1994) excluded the possibility-indicating that without exclusion the agreement could have been automatically considered a Common Article 3 Special Agreement. In the 2016 Commentary to the Geneva Conventions, the International Committee of the Red Cross names a number of additional peace agreements which it views as Common Article 3 Special Agreements, despite the circumstance that those agreements do not state this in their text.…”

Section: The Final Accord's Legal Status and Enforceability Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lex Pacificatoria Colombiana: Colombia’s Peace Accord in Comparative Perspective

Bell¹

2016

AJIL Unbound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this short piece, I open a conversation over how the Colombian Final Peace Accord provides evidence of, and a contribution to, a more general lex pacificatoria or "law of the peacemakers" (lex pax for short). 1 In light of the Accord's recent ballot defeat, I integrate into this assessment the merits of using a referendum to approve (in Colombia's case "affirm or deny") the Agreement as a whole. Throughout, I draw on a peace agreement database which has coded over one thousand four hundred peace agreements since 1990 for comparative insight. 2 Lex Pacificatoria: A New Law of the PeacemakersThe practice of negotiating ends to conflict within states can be understood as producing a lex pacificatoria or "law of the peacemakers." 3 This lex pax arises from the attempt to fit the existing laws of war or of peace to the distinctive dilemmas that arise in transitions from conflict. These legal innovations clarify and extend existing international law as it applies to transitions. The lex pax is created by the interaction of both state and nonstate actors involved in the transition process, who respond to legal norms and try to craft solutions that comply with them in creative ways so as to respond to the distinctive dilemmas of peace-making. Other similar attempts to characterize the distinctive application of law in times of transition have argued that a new regime in the form of a ius post bellum or "law of the postconflict period," is at play. 4 In contrast, I have used the term lex pacificatoria that, like the concept of lex mercatoria (law of the merchants), suggests legal developments that have a more "intimated" existence rooted in a legalization of practice rather than a coherent and distinctive new legal regime. 5 The lex pax is not a new coherent distinctive legal regime, because that project is

show abstract

The Legal Status of the Colombian Peace Agreement

Cited by 7 publications

References 4 publications

Constitucionalismo y Justicia Transicional: el proceso de paz entre Colombia y las FARC-EP

Constitucionalismo y Justicia Transicional: el proceso de paz entre Colombia y las FARC-EP

(Un)constitutional change rooted in peace agreements

Lex Pacificatoria Colombiana: Colombia’s Peace Accord in Comparative Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About