Chairs:

• Camila de Gamboa Tapias – camila.degamboa@urosario.edu.co
• María Camila Correa – mariaca.correa@urosario.edu.co

SPEAKERS

Cristina	Viana
Cristina	Sanchez Muñoz
Gloria María	Gallego García
Julieta	Lemaitre Ripoll

Colombia has endured an armed conflict lasting more than six decades. Although several governments since the late 1980s have made efforts—some more successful than others—an effective transition toward stable and lasting peace has not been achieved, and the armed conflict has evolved, with old and new actors and new dynamics intertwined with well-established warfare strategies.

Since 2005, Colombia has used various transitional justice mechanisms to move from war to peace, primarily through two models: the Justice and Peace Law and the Havana Peace Accord, as well as through the constitutionalization of transitional justice in the Legal Framework for Peace. The development of transitional justice in Colombia has been significantly informed by the rich jurisprudence of the Colombian Constitutional Court and the Inter-American Human Rights System, as well as by theoretical reflections from experts in the field.

In this workshop, we invite presenters to participate with academic reflections from experts on the following aspects of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP):

The JEP and its similarities and differences with other transitional tribunals.ational) par les Chambres et Sections de la JEP.

Analysis of the acknowledgments of responsibility by appearing parties in the public hearings of the macro-cases in which this procedure has been carried out by the judges of the Chamber for the Acknowledgment of Truth, Responsibility, and Determination of Facts and Conducts.

Analyze the restorative approaches proposed by the Chamber for the Acknowledgment of Truth, Responsibility, and Determination of Facts and Conducts, aimed at ensuring that those appearing before the tribunal repair the collective harms they have caused to victims.

Analysis of the first decisions issued by the JEP Tribunal regarding the sanctions imposed on those appearing before it and the restorative projects ordered.

Critical analysis of the institutional and jurisdictional design of the JEP: its scope, limits, and risks.

The use of normative bodies (such as International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law) by the Chambers and Sections of the JEP.