(FLIP/IFEX) – FLIP is concerned about contradictions and confusion regarding the right to make public the version libre” (“freely given”) testimony of paramilitary group leaders participating in the peace process with the government, under which sentence reductions are provided to paramilitary members at all levels who voluntarily provide full details of their crimes. In December […]
(FLIP/IFEX) – FLIP is concerned about contradictions and confusion regarding the right to make public the version libre” (“freely given”) testimony of paramilitary group leaders participating in the peace process with the government, under which sentence reductions are provided to paramilitary members at all levels who voluntarily provide full details of their crimes.
In December 2006, the Prosecutor General’s Office (Fiscalía General de la Nación) issued a resolution allowing victims of paramilitary violence to be present at this stage of the process, so long as they provide evidence of damages suffered and renounce their right to the protection of their identities. This decision was supported by the eighth prosecutor of the Justice and Peace Unit of the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation (Unidad de Justicia y Paz de la Fiscalía General de la Nación), which is now receiving the statements of Salvatore Mancuso Gómez, one of the leaders of the demobilized paramilitary groups.
Nevertheless, given the objections of media outlets and victims’ associations to the above resolution, Prosecutor General (Fiscal General de la Nación) Mario Iguarán Arana stated in an 18 January 2007 press release that his office “has not had, and does not have, any objection to the broadcasting on radio or television of the statements [“versiones libres”] offered by those applying for coverage under the Justice and Peace Law [Ley de Justicia y Paz]”.
FLIP wishes to underline the fact that the right to have access to information relating to the demobilisation and judgement process does not depend on the decisions of judicial authorities nor the willingness of the government. Article 74 of the Constitution establishes the right of every person to have access to public documents, except in exceptional situations stipulated by the law. Public access is the rule, secrecy the exception. Exceptions can only be defined by the Constitution or the law, never by an administrative authority.
This matter is referred to in the Justice and Peace Law and was reviewed by the Constitutional Court, which ruled that the proceedings could only be kept secret if the other general requirements that would have to be met for any other criminal proceedings to be kept secret were met.
FLIP states “it is on this point that the victims, social organisations, media outlets and the community in general require absolute clarity. With these public hearings, the Prosecutor General’s Office must explain the norms that it will apply and, if necessary, the Constitutional Court must clarify this extremely important issue. Access to information is the fundamental instrument to guarantee society’s right to the truth.”
