Justicia transicional y populismo punitivo en los procesos de paz en Colombia

Abstract

The present review and analysis article is the result of a thorough documentary review that examines conceptual aspects related to transitional justice and its difference from ordinary justice. The exercise took as a reference the experience of countries that have made efforts to emerge from situations of internal conflict generated by dictatorships, de facto governments, and internal intersectoral wars. Two positions are analyzed, which, although generally opposed, are commonly perceived in various sectors of society: one tends to assume a commitment to peace and omits the sanctions that should be received by the perpetrators of human rights violations, war crimes, and crimes against humanity; the other posits ideological narratives of punitive populism that insist on judging those who acted as perpetrators of the same crimes and sat down to dialogue and negotiate without having been defeated in combat. According to this second position, severe exemplary sanctions typical of the ordinary justice system should be applied to these individuals as a guarantee of non-repetition. Consequently, some measures of community education and incentives for social participation are proposed to involve broad sectors of Colombian society through actions of awareness, information, and training. These actions aim to ensure that the ongoing agreements are beneficial for the entire society, to begin repairing the social fabric deteriorated during several decades of internal conflict, and to allow society to start healing and continue its path toward full development.