Uncategorized

En varias oportunidades, el actual gobierno ha defendido la tesis de que en Colombia no existe un conflicto armado sino una amenaza terrorista contra una democracia y contra la ciudadanía. Múltiples comentaristas y analistas han criticado esa tesis gubernamental, ya sea por ser contradictoria, pues en otros discursos el mismo gobierno parece reconocer la guerra,…

Latin America went through years of great political agitation between the early sixties and the late eighties. Those times were hard on democracy. Leftist movements openly opposed not only the governments but also the constitutional institutions of the time. The State –and the law, which sustained it- were seen as the source of all social problems. Faced with such criticisms, traditional parties and their spokesmen entered a period of confusion and political indecision. They wanted to establish strategic alliances with spokesmen of the opposition. However, traditional parties were reluctant to the revolutionary measures desired by the latter; they were only willing to accept reforms to the existent situation.

This paper aims at answering the following question: is it appropriate and convenient to use the restorative justice model as the dominant paradigm to analyze and solve the problems of transitional justice and reconciliation? We believe this is a relevant question, since many argue, especially after the South African transition, that transitional processes should be founded on restorative justice. This is the case of Colombia, where the restorative justice model has been defended by many as the best way to face the atrocities committed by paramilitary groups, which are currently negotiating peace with the government.