News (Media Awareness Project) - Colombia's top court, in 54 ruling, upholds controversial armed citizen groups |
Title: | Colombia's top court, in 54 ruling, upholds controversial armed citizen groups |
Published On: | 1997-11-08 |
Source: | Houston Chronicle |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-07 20:08:12 |
Colombia's top court, in 54 ruling, upholds controversial armed citizen
groups
By Frank Bajak
Associated Press
BOGOTA, Colombia Colombia's highest court on Friday upheld the legality
of armed citizens' groups, which critics say have overstepped their mandate
and committed serious human rights abuses.
By a 54 vote, the Constitutional Court said the groups, known as Convivir,
may continue to operate but must surrender all arms except handguns within
48 hours.
The court's president, Antonio Barrera, said the decision endorses the will
of "9 million Colombians who approved the mandate for peace," a vague
ballot issue in Oct. 26 nationwide elections.
President Ernesto Samper said the decision gives citizens the legitimate
right to defend themselves.
"You cannot deny a citizen the right, under limits established by law and
the constitution, to defend their life and property," he said during a
visit to Cartagena in northern Colombia.
Convivir, whose name means "getting along," was started with the
government's approval to counter leftist rebels. Members are supposed to
give intelligence to police and the military, and proponents say they have
reduced kidnappings and other crimes by guerrillas.
But several of the groups have been implicated in killings, and though
authorities have asked that these be disbanded, none has had its license
revoked.
Human rights groups say Convivir abuses range from "social cleansing" in
urban areas the killing of petty thieves, drug addicts and prostitutes
to helping paramilitary groups kill suspected rebel collaborators.
They also claim Convivir has hundreds of machine guns and other heavy
weapons, a charge denied by the federal Office of Private Security that
oversees the groups.
The federal ombudsman, Jose Castro Caicedo, and the U.N. special envoy for
human rights, Almudena Mazarrasa, argued before the court in August that
the groups were unconstitutional.
"We've always said they had offensive, militarystyle weapons," Caicedo
said Friday. "Until today, they have been operating without any control."
A judge who voted against the groups, Valdimiro Naranjo, called Convivir "a
form of paramilitarism that involves civilians in the armed conflict" and
said they violate international humanitarian law spelled out in the Geneva
conventions.
Colombia has 414 registered Convivir groups. The president of the national
Convivir federation, who uses the pseudonym Carlos Diaz, denied they are
involved in any atrocities.
He says they have fewer than 400 weapons none of them rifles among
5,500 employees and 300,000 volunteers nationwide.
Colombia has about 1,000 groups similar to Convivir, less than half of
which are registered, Diaz said.
Convivir supporters have said that if declared illegal, the groups would
merely go underground.
Also Friday, the high court declared illegal any group formed to protect
multinational corporations, such as oil companies, because such a group
would be performing a service constitutionally restricted to the armed
forces.
groups
By Frank Bajak
Associated Press
BOGOTA, Colombia Colombia's highest court on Friday upheld the legality
of armed citizens' groups, which critics say have overstepped their mandate
and committed serious human rights abuses.
By a 54 vote, the Constitutional Court said the groups, known as Convivir,
may continue to operate but must surrender all arms except handguns within
48 hours.
The court's president, Antonio Barrera, said the decision endorses the will
of "9 million Colombians who approved the mandate for peace," a vague
ballot issue in Oct. 26 nationwide elections.
President Ernesto Samper said the decision gives citizens the legitimate
right to defend themselves.
"You cannot deny a citizen the right, under limits established by law and
the constitution, to defend their life and property," he said during a
visit to Cartagena in northern Colombia.
Convivir, whose name means "getting along," was started with the
government's approval to counter leftist rebels. Members are supposed to
give intelligence to police and the military, and proponents say they have
reduced kidnappings and other crimes by guerrillas.
But several of the groups have been implicated in killings, and though
authorities have asked that these be disbanded, none has had its license
revoked.
Human rights groups say Convivir abuses range from "social cleansing" in
urban areas the killing of petty thieves, drug addicts and prostitutes
to helping paramilitary groups kill suspected rebel collaborators.
They also claim Convivir has hundreds of machine guns and other heavy
weapons, a charge denied by the federal Office of Private Security that
oversees the groups.
The federal ombudsman, Jose Castro Caicedo, and the U.N. special envoy for
human rights, Almudena Mazarrasa, argued before the court in August that
the groups were unconstitutional.
"We've always said they had offensive, militarystyle weapons," Caicedo
said Friday. "Until today, they have been operating without any control."
A judge who voted against the groups, Valdimiro Naranjo, called Convivir "a
form of paramilitarism that involves civilians in the armed conflict" and
said they violate international humanitarian law spelled out in the Geneva
conventions.
Colombia has 414 registered Convivir groups. The president of the national
Convivir federation, who uses the pseudonym Carlos Diaz, denied they are
involved in any atrocities.
He says they have fewer than 400 weapons none of them rifles among
5,500 employees and 300,000 volunteers nationwide.
Colombia has about 1,000 groups similar to Convivir, less than half of
which are registered, Diaz said.
Convivir supporters have said that if declared illegal, the groups would
merely go underground.
Also Friday, the high court declared illegal any group formed to protect
multinational corporations, such as oil companies, because such a group
would be performing a service constitutionally restricted to the armed
forces.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...