DEMOBILIZATION LAWS: COMPETING DRAFTS IN SPECIAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 BOGOTA 001660

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/18/2015
TAGS: KJUS PHUM PTER PINR PGOV CO
SUBJECT: DEMOBILIZATION LAWS: COMPETING DRAFTS IN SPECIAL
SESSION


Classified By: Ambassador William B. Wood for reasons
1.4 (b) and (d).

--------------
Summary
--------------


1. (C) On February 9, the GOC formally presented to Congress
its version of a law that would impose alternative sentences
on members of illegal armed groups accused of serious crimes
who demobilize and comply with specific conditions. A group
of Colombian legislators led by Senator Rafael Pardo formally
submitted a similar bill on February 3. On February 15, the
Colombian Congress began a special session to debate the
bills. The GOC and Pardo bills share many identical
articles, but miscommunication, political rivalries, and
negotiating tactics may have prevented complete consensus.
The main difference is in their treatment of "confession."
The final text will continue to be modified as the
Congressional debate develops. The GOC is still making
changes to its bill. President Uribe gave the Peace
Commissioner permission to suggest changes to Congress and
the Minister of Interior and Justice. Uribe and his legal
adviser have expressed confidence that the GOC will reach
agreement with Pardo in the next three weeks and that a final
version will be approved by June. Seven other drafts have
been submitted by other Congressmen, which could inflence the
final text, especially a version submitted by Representative
Armando Benedetti that would not have such vigorous
requirements for the beneficiaries. We have emphasized that
the final draft should not harm the U.S.-Colombian
extradition relationship, should require a five year minimum
sentence for paramilitary leaders, and should prevent drug
lords from buying into the process. End Summary.

--------------
GOC and Pardo Bills Similar
--------------


2. (C) The GOC and a group of Congressmen led by Senator
Pardo drafted bills that would impose alternative sentences
on members of illegal armed groups accused of serious crimes
who demobilize and comply with specific conditions. The two
groups had been negotiating over the past several weeks and
came close to agreeing on a text. However, talks broke down
early in the week of January 30. It appears miscommunication
and political rivalries played a role. The negotiators may
also have been delaying an agreement because there was little
incentive for the Pardo group to make concessions to arrive
at an agreement prior to the Congressional session. Each
side decided to formally present its own draft to Congress.
Pardo presented his group's bill -- the "Law for Truth,
Justice, and Reparations" -- on February 3, while the GOC
presented its "Law for Justice and Peace" on February 9.
President Uribe and his legal adviser Camilo Ospina have
expressed confidence that they will reach an agreement with
the Pardo group within in the next three weeks and that a
final version will be approved by June. Pardo, however, has
said consensus will be difficult after high-level GOC
officials publicly criticized his draft.


3. (C) Despite the breakdown in talks, the two versions share
many articles. Pardo estimates the GOC draft contains 80
percent of his text. The basic components of both drafts
are:

-- Members of illegal armed groups who demobilize and meet
specific conditions, including that the organization has
released all hostages and was not primarily dedicated to drug
trafficking, may be eligible for reduced prison sentences for
serious crimes;

-- The GOC gives the Prosecutor General's Office ("Fiscalia")
a list of the group's members, including ranks, illicit
assets, and crimes they are suspected of committing;

-- Legal proceedings against individuals guilty only of
crimes with a maximum sentences of six years or less are
suspended if they fulfill specific requirements, including
confessing their crimes, surrendering illicit assets, and
submitting to a period of supervised probation.
-- Individuals guilty of crimes with penalties of more than
six years must serve five to ten years in confinement and
fulfill auxiliary punishments, including providing
reparations to victims. They also must confess crimes and
surrender illicit assets. After serving their sentence, they
must submit to a period of supervised parole. A Tribunal for
Truth, Justice, and Reparations imposes the sentence and
auxiliary punishments in each individual case.

-- Victims are guaranteed symbolic and material reparations.
The Inspector General's Office ("Procurduria") oversees the
process to assure that victims' rights are protected.

--------------
Confession
--------------


4. (C) Pardo has said the main disagreement is over
confession. Although both the GOC and Pardo versions require
beneficiaries to confess their crimes, they each use
different language subject to varying interpretations.
Pardo's version states that confessions must be "complete,"
"trustworthy," and encompass all crimes in which a
beneficiary participated. If a beneficiary fails to confess
a crime or declare any illicit asset he loses all benefits.
The GOC version's language is less specific, requiring a
"confession" and stating that a beneficiary who fails to
fulfill any of the law's conditions will lose all benefits
and be required to serve the full sentence imposed for his
crimes.


5. (C) Senator Pardo claims his version is the strictest in
enforcing the requirement of confession. He has emphasized
that a full confession is key to fully dismantling the United
Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) and other illegal armed
groups that may eventually demobilize.

--------------
Other Differences
--------------


6. (C) Presidential legal adviser Ospina noted other
differences between the Pardo and GOC drafts, but said the
two sides are nearing consensus. Congressman Luis Fernando
Velasco, one of the drafters of the Pardo version, downplayed
the differences but acknowledged they are likely to arise
during Congressional debate. Congresswoman Gina Parody,
another Pardo drafter, echoed his view:

-- Armed Conflict: The Pardo version makes reference to an
"armed conflict" when defining victims, combatants, and other
elements of the law. The GOC has consistently rejected the
use of the term "armed conflict" and is unlikely to accept
reference to one in a law. Ospina believes the Pardo group
will accept language using "armed groups" instead of
conflict.

-- Reparations: Both versions include detailed sections on
the rights of victims and required reparations. The Pardo
version makes the State responsible for providing mandated
reparations (with no limits) that demobilized combatants fail
to provide. Ospina said the GOC was considering including
limited state responsibility, but that Minister of Interior
and Justice Pretelt had not accepted the change yet. The
versions also differ slightly in how they define victims.
The GOC version defines a victim as anyone who was harmed by
the illegal armed group, while the Pardo version defines
victims more broadly, as anyone who suffered from crimes --
whether actions or omissions -- related to the armed
conflict. This seemingly minor difference is significant,
since only State actors can commit crimes of "omission."

-- Length of Incarceration: Both the GOC and Pardo versions
require beneficiaries to spend five to ten years in
confinement. The GOC version allows a beneficiary to reduce
his term by up to 18 months for time spent in a concentration
zone during peace talks after fully demobilizing. It also
authorizes the GOC to create additional concentration zones
where beneficiaries can serve their sentences, as long as the
zones meet National Penitentiary Institute (INPEC) standards.
The Pardo version limits credit for time spent in a
concentration zone to 12 months, provided the beneficiary was
demobilized and under the complete control of the State while
in the zone.

-- Length of Parole: Both versions require a supervised
parole period after incarceration that includes home visits
and electronic monitoring. The GOC version sets the parole
period at one-fifth of the length of confinement (1-2 years),
while the Pardo version calls for a parole period of 8 years.

-- Individual Participation: The GOC version allows
individuals who desert from an illegal armed group to benefit
from the law. Pardo has said he will accept this provision
as long as it does not allow leaders of an illegal armed
group already involved in peace negotiations to benefit
without being held accountable for their troops' actions.

-- Tribunal Composition: The drafts differ on the number of
magistrates on the Truth, Justice, and Reparations Tribunal,
the body responsible for issuing alternative sentence and
auxiliary punishments and verifying beneficiaries'
compliance. The GOC version calls for a three-judge
tribunal, expandable to nine judges, that operates for four
years. The Pardo version calls for a nine-judge panel to
operate for 12 years.

--------------
Other Drafts
--------------


7. (C) In the past week, at least six other members of
Congress presented alternative versions of the law. Two
drafts have sufficient support to influence the debate and
possibly the final text:

-- Uribista Senator Armando Benedetti submitted a version
similar to an early GOC draft criticized for leniency.
Several other Uribe supporters were co-signers and the press
speculated that Peace Commissioner Restrepo was a
behind-the-scenes advocate.

-- Senator Piedad Cordoba, a victim of a paramilitary
kidnapping, drafted a bill focused on guaranteeing victims'
rights, including a truth commission. It is the most
punitive of the competing drafts. She has publicly declared
that she wants to see the paramilitaries spend their lives in
jail. Restrepo has predicted that elements of Cordoba's
truth mechanism will be included in the final law.

--------------
More Modifications Coming
--------------


8. (C) The GOC itself is not entirely on board with its text
and is still making modifications. Restrepo and Vice
President Santos have both expressed reservations about the
draft. On February 16, Uribe gave Restrepo permission to
suggest changes to Congress and Minister of Interior and
Justice Pretelt. Restrepo has said some aspects of the GOC
are unrealistically harsh and would jeopardize the peace
process. Both Pardo and Velasco have predicted that the law
that eventually passes will be a blend of the GOC and Pardo
versions with some elements of other drafts. We have
emphasized that any draft must not harm the U.S.-Colombian
extradition relationship, require a five year minimum
sentence for paramilitary leaders, and prevent drug lords
from buying into the process (prospects and logistics of
legislative process reported in septel).


9. (C) Velasco has warned that the paramilitaries are
exerting heavy pressure on members of Congress to support a
lenient bill. As Congressional elections near (March 2006),
some members of Congress may grow increasingly interested in
the votes and financial support the paramilitaries can offer.


WOOD