The closure of Colombia's case before the International Criminal Court (ICC) has generated extensive reflections on the scope of international justice and its interaction with national justice systems. This event, announced in October 2021, marked a milestone in the relationship between the ICC and Colombia, a country that faced an internal armed conflict for decades. In this article, we explore the legal and practical reasons that led the ICC to make this decision, based on the principle of complementarity and the South American country's commitment to transitional justice.

Context of the case

The situation in Colombia was the subject of a preliminary examination by the ICC since 2004, due to crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly committed in the context of the armed conflict. The Court analyzed acts perpetrated by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), paramilitary groups and State agents. During the preliminary examination, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor focused on assessing whether Colombian authorities were conducting genuine investigations and prosecutions against those responsible for these crimes.

The principle of complementarity: the key to decision making

The Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the ICC, establishes the principle of complementarity, according to which the Court only intervenes when national justice systems are unable or unwilling to carry out genuine proceedings. This principle was decisive in the closure of the Colombia case. Over the years, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor noted that the Colombian authorities had made significant progress in investigating and prosecuting serious crimes, demonstrating a commitment to accountability.

The role of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP)

One of the most relevant factors that influenced the ICC's decision was the creation and operation of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP), a transitional justice mechanism established following the peace agreement signed between the Colombian government and the FARC in 2016. The SJP was designed to investigate, judge and sanction the most serious crimes committed during the conflict, with a focus on reparations for victims and national reconciliation.

The work of the SJP proved to be a genuine effort to address crimes under the ICC's jurisdiction. The Court's Office of the Prosecutor acknowledged that this national court had taken significant steps to investigate both former FARC combatants and members of the Armed Forces involved in cases such as the "false positives," which consisted of the execution of civilians presented as guerrillas killed in combat.

Continuous monitoring and cooperation

Despite the closure of the case, the ICC Office of the Prosecutor will maintain constant monitoring of the Colombian authorities' progress on justice. This monitoring reflects the Court's confidence in the Colombian judicial system's ability to meet its international obligations, but also underscores the importance of the country's continued commitment to justice and accountability.

ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan stressed that the closure of the preliminary examination does not mean that the Court will abandon victims or disengage from developments in Colombia. On the contrary, this decision should be interpreted as a recognition of the country's efforts and an incentive to continue strengthening its justice system.

Conclusions

The closure of the Colombia case before the ICC represents a remarkable example of how the principle of complementarity can work in practice. This decision underscores the importance of States assuming their primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting the most serious crimes. It also highlights the fundamental role of transitional justice mechanisms, such as the SJP, in post-conflict contexts.

At Venfort Abogados, we understand the relevance of this type of decisions to strengthen the rule of law and confidence in national institutions. As experts in international criminal law, we are prepared to advise and represent our clients in cases related to transitional justice and ICC proceedings, always with a professional approach and committed to the principles of justice and fairness.