Letter:
Dr. Alvaro Uribe Velez President of the Republic of Colombia auribe@presidencia.gov.co RE: Child and Youth Protection from Armed Conflict Mr. President: It is of public knowledge that the grave human rights situation in the country has especially affected children. There are 16’800.000 boys and girls in Colombia, accounting for 41.5% of Colombia’s total population.  59.8% of Colombians are underneath the poverty line and 591.900 children live in misery.  A child’s right to live, develop, be protected and to participate in society, is violated in both public and private spheres when no policies, plans or social programs are set. [1] According to the Ombudsman´s “Report on Children’s Human Rights in Colombia for 2001”, 2.041 children were murdered, 111 died in violent unclarified situations, 303 were kidnapped and 93.012 were displaced last year. On top of these human rights violations, the degradation of the Colombian armed conflict has continued to force children into the horrible world of war at a very young age.  They are witnesses and victims to attacks on the civil population including assassinations, massacres, and genocides. They are displaced and inevitably suffer from famine and illness. Many of them are orphaned; others disappear or are subject to cruel and inhumane treatment.  And many of them end up working for the numerous illegally armed groups.   According to the Ombudsman, 20% of all boys and girls in Colombia directly or indirectly participate in armed conflict. [2]   The Colombian Army, UNICEF, and the Ombudsman all estimate there are between 6.000 and 15.000 children linked to the guerrillas and paramilitaries. All these boys and girls clearly suffer from the consequences of armed conflict.  But their long-term psychosocial effects are yet to be determined. If they voluntarily decide to quit their respective armed group they are considered deserters and may be executed.  If they turn themselves into the authorities or are caught by them, they suffer the consequences of the judicial process. All of these children have been and will be exposed to torture, sexual exploitation, long-term imprisonment, and separation of their families, invariably violating their rights as children and human beings.  Mr. President, Colombian children are one of the most vulnerable sectors of the country to armed conflict, and some of your government’s proposals and actions will make the situation for the children of Colombia more difficult.  Let me address some of these proposals and actions: 1. Policy on  prevention of the involvement boys, girls and youth In your document Proposals about Childhood and Family, you outlined a strategy to “fight the use of children in internal conflict” based on the following [3] : A firm enforcement of authority, which will prevent children and juveniles from enrolling in guerilla or paramilitary goups. A policy that brings study and work opportunities to children and young people who join reinstatement programs. Strategy development for rehabilitating children who have been victims of forced recruitment by violent groups.          Causes for child enrollment to an armed group in Colombia are diverse; among the most frequent we find: *family factors:  violence, disintegration of the family, the objectification of childhood which leads to a poor self esteem, abuse, etc.; *economic factors:  in the face of poverty, the needs of a child’s family and the absence of alternative job offers, enlistment is an economical opportunity; *the desire to avenge a group who has perpetrated violent acts or the idea that joining a group is going to protect their family; *romantic ties to a member of an armed group, *and ongoing marginalization, exploitation, and abuse of children living in this country which continues to negate their rights. Mr. President, so far there hasn’t been found child enlistment to be a result of “lack of authority.”  Children are enlisting because of a lack of caring family relations and the absence of response to state obligations; manifested from the lack of study and work opportunities, the margination of communities and not recognizing their rights. For this reason, we do not consider your proposal for a “strong enforcement of authority” to effectively combat enlistment causes.  On the contrary, it strengthens the totalitarian and authoritative conceptions that have put our children on the path to war. Mr. President, your proposal also distinguishes between treatment of children who are recruited “by force” and what is wrongfully understood as “voluntary recruitment.”  This distinction is against international understanding of child enrollment to opposition armed groups, illegal armed groups and the State Armed Forces. “The Repercussions of Armed Conflicts for Children”, presented to the UN General Assembly in September 1996 by Graça Machel - UNO’s General Secretary Expert of armed conflict consequences on children - indicates that although children may show up “voluntarily” for military service, the action cannot be considered voluntary:  “Even if it might look like young men choose military service, this choice isn’t made freely.  They might be pushed by different forces, even cultural, economical or political  pressures”. For many children there is no other alternative to war.  In addition to the fore mentioned causes of child participation in armed conflict, examples set by adults, lack of public policies to help children, and the State’s military action to eradicate armed conflict, children who who want to leave the armed groups will be considered “deserters” and can be summarily executed [4] .  It is clear that the concept of voluntary enlistment is, at least, deceptive. According to article 39 of the Children’s Rights Agreement, the State’s duty is to promote reintegration for child victims of recruitment and armed conflict into society [5] .  Children linked to armed conflict must be considered victims of crimes committed by adults.  So understood in article 8 of the Rome Statute and number 162 of Colombian Criminal Code. We hope that your administration’s proposals take into consideration these principles for all children who are victims of the war.  2.  Juvenile Criminal Responsibility In regards to juvenile criminal responsibility you have proposed “harsher treatment towards the dangerous delinquent minor” [6] and  “evaluating if 18 should continue to be the minimal age for penal responsibility or the convenience of reducing it”. [7] The Convention on the Rights of the Child declares that a child is “any human being younger than 18 years old, except if, in virtue of an applicable law, he has reached adulthood earlier.” [8] The Convention also declares that for children who have violated criminal laws, specific mechanisms should be set forth which take into consideration their special conditions and that judicial procedures will be followed as least as possible. [9] An analysis of whether the age of 18 for criminal responsibility should be reduced, as suggested by your administration, clearly contrasts the declaration of the Convention.  Reducing the age of criminal responsibility would also create ambivalence in terms of declaring young people “uncapable” in the sphere of political and civil rights (since you are not planning in reducing the “coming of age” age), and “capable” of criminally answering for their behavior in the same conditions as adults. In contrast to your administration’s proposals, the Riad Guidelines [10] promote prevention of juvenile delinquency through the creation of opportunities that tend to the needs of the young.  The conscience of classifying a young man as “lost”, “delinquent” or “pre delinquent” frequently contributes to permanent undesirable behavioral guidelines.  Instead of being considered a simple object for socialization and control, the importance of a young person’s participation in different social spaces and processes is a measure for prevention of juvenile delinquency.  The administration’s proposal of “harsher treatment towards the dangerous delinquent minor” has traces of anachronistic criminological doctrine of social perilous ness.  It breaches the principles established by Riad guidelines for prevention of juvenile delinquency, keeping a system of repression and criminalization for children who break the law. So far Colombia has shown little progress in respect to Children’s fundamental rights—even when they are prevalent in the National Constitution.  It is pertinent that your Government immediately consider establishing public policy which include specific measures for the prevention of juvenile delinquency before thinking about penalizing children.  3.  The network of cooperators Throughout your campaign you promoted the idea of creating a web of state paid cooperators to support public forces [11] .  A day after you took office you launched an operational web of informants in the roadways of Valledupar, Capital of Cesar [12] .  You also declared that before the year was over the Armed Forces would enroll about 100.000 citizens as soldiers and support policemen.  Faced with the possibility that the 100.000 citizens would become an easy target for the guerrilla, you declared: “ If it is one or two informants, they will be killed.  However, if they are thousands and we become a million it they will have to kill us all, if they have to.” [13] As you very well know, Doctor Uribe, this informational strategy generates serious concerns.  In the first place, the operation involves great risks for the informants of becoming targets of attacks.  Secondly, anonymity will help protect their lives, but also includes an implied risk of accusation without basis. Children are especially vulnerable to these risks.  If the government already accepts that children are linked to the armed conflict, it is clear that children will also be suspected of by informants or victims of unjustified accusations.  As far as we know, the governement has not set forth training or control for its cooperators in regards to children receiving special treatment.  Meaning there are no mechanisms that protect children’s rights. Furthermore, the government has not made any declarations concerning age limits for participation in the informants web; implying a risk that children can become legalized informants for the Armed Forces.  4.   The Competence of the International Penal Court On August 5th of 2002, President Patrana’s government, with the approval of the succeding government, implimented the ratification instruments of the Rome Statute declaring (based on the opportunity granted by Article 124 of the same statute) that for the next seven years, beginning when the statute is in effect, the government would not accept the International Penal Court’s competence in reference to criminal standing, referenced in article 8, when the perpetration of these crimes is denounced by its natives or in its territory. Mr. President:  article 8 of the Statute states that the recruitment or enlistment of children younger than 15 in the Armed Forces or their use to actively participate in hostile behavior in international armed conflict and non-international armed conflict is a war crime. The Government’s decision not recognize the International Penal Court’s authority to prosecute war crimes has repercussions not only regarding illegaly armed groups, when there could be possible peace negotiations, but it also implies that members of the Colombian or Foreign Armed Forces will not follow trial if they perpetrate these behaviors in National territory. One of the gravest ramifications of this decision is that for seven years the International Penal Court will not be aware of criminals (felony) recruiting minors younger than 15—a crime which has been increasing because of the degradation of internal armed conflict. Mr. President:  This decision curtails one of the most important defense mechanisms for children linked to armed conflict and contradicts international regulations.  It will have ominous consequences for children who are involved with the armed conflict.  For many children, a change in policy in seven years will be too late.                                          It is in your hands Mr. President to ratify one of the most apt international tools for the protection of the Colombian children from the ill-fated consequences of war:   The Convention’s Optional Protocol regarding children and armed conflicts, now in the process of being added to Colombian legislation, establishes 18 as the minimal age for mandatory enrollment and forbids non-governmental armed groups from enlisting and using minors in confrontations.  It also demands governments to take measures to demobilize, rehabilitate and reinstate children to society who have belonged to any armed group. For all of the above reasons I respectfully request: The ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict. Application of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optioanl Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict. Make a declaration linking the stated in numeral 2 article 3 of the Protocol with the established 18 age minimum for voluntary recruitment to the state’s armed forces. Assure rehabilitation and reintegration into civil society for children that have been linked to the armed conflict.  Under no circumstance shall they be treated like criminals. Lift Article 124 of the Rome Statute and accept authority of the International Penal Court  in regards to war crimes starting in 2003. Do not involve civilians, especially children, in the armed conflict via the web of cooperators. Implement public policy for children—especially for the more impoverished and vulnerable areas—which includes alternatives for preventing youth from joining the armed conflict, as well as mechanisms allowing children to exercise thier human rights. Agree to not enroll any person under 18 to state police or armed forces either directly or indirectly. Search for humanitarian compromises with conflict groups, including not enlisting minors under 18, demobilizing all minors and respecting children as part of the civilian population. With respect,