International Law and Transitional Justice: Exploring Some Challenges Through the Colombian Case

Latin America has always been central to the configuration, interpretation, and operation of the field of transitional justice. Starting in the late 1980s with contributions from scholars interested in democratic transitions after dictatorships in the Southern Cone, the 1996 signing of the Peace Agreement in Guatemala, and the Truth Commission in Peru, to the more recent case of Colombia, Latin American academics and activists have contributed significantly to the theory and practice of transitional justice. This essay explores a question central to recent transitional justice processes: the interaction and possible contradictions between the aim of ending a violent internal conflict and the demands imposed by international law. Colombia serves as an example. The Colombian case is informed by all previous experiences, but it is also novel because it is the first transitional justice process established in the region since the establishment of the International Criminal Court. Although the Colombian process is still being implemented and it is too early to claim its success or failure, the case offers important insights into the tense, complex, and overarching interactions between international law, internal peace, and transitional justice. This essay explores how local and external actors involved in negotiating and implementing the agreement presented international law as if it were univocal and universal, as if there were no competing interpretations within the discipline, and as if it were neutral in relation to local political discussions. Building upon this analysis, the goal is to shed light upon the ideological uses of international law.