The FCO’s human rights work in 2012

Written evidence from ABColombia (HR 7)

1.0 ABColombia is the advocacy project of a group of five leading UK and Irish organisations with programmes in Colombia: CAFOD, Christian Aid UKI, Oxfam GB, SCIAF and Trócaire. It was founded in 1997 to work on the question of forced internal displacement; it has since expanded its mandate to cover human rights and development. The work of ABColombia is rooted in the experiences of the organisations and communities with whom members work (around 100 partners organisations), which include afro-Colombian, peasant farmer and indigenous communities, and women’s groups.

2.0 Summary

2.1 ABColombia welcomes the opportunity of making a submission to the UK Foreign Affairs Committee inquiry into the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s human rights work in 2012. This submission addresses three areas of the report: Colombia as a country of concern; the G8 declaration and the Prevention of Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative (PSVI) and business and human rights in relation to our experience on the ground in Colombia.

2.2 ABColombia agrees with the FCO report’s analysis of structural problems in Colombia but finds it lacks analysis on the activities of the paramilitary groups operating in Colombia, at times allegedly in collusion with the security forces . O n the ground these groups continue to actively violation rights and are an obstacle to peace in Colombia.

2.3 An error in the statistical data in the hard copy of the report meant a lack of analysis regarding the deterioration in the situation for human rights defenders in Colombia. In fact in just two years, 2010 (32 killed) to 2012 (69 killed), the numbers killed has more than doubled. [1] Along with the criminalisation of human rights defenders this represents a major challenge.

2.4 According to the Colombian Constitutional Court the vast majority of conflict related sexual violence in Colombia is not reported. In our experience the crimes that are brought to the attention of the authorities are done so with the support of NGOs, without which none of these crimes would have reached the justice system. Prioritizing funding for Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in the access to justice element of the PSVI and G8 strategies is therefore essential. In recent years UK funding [2] to Colombia has increasingly insisted on NGOs working in partnership with the Colombian Government. Whilst dialogue with the State is essential for change to happen, working in partnership is not always desirable when bringing judicial cases against State security forces and/or officials.

2.5 The implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions on Women, Peace and Security should be a prerequisite to being elected onto the Security Council; otherwise a negative message is given to other countries about the importance of implementing Resolutions on women and sexual violence. Colombia has just left the UN Security Council without developing a National Action Plan on Resolution 1325, despite the best efforts of women’s NGOs.

2.6 We welcome the efforts made by the UK Government to consult civil society on its strategy for the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and its support to Colombia to develop its own policy. In respect to its work on this, the Embassy sought to operate a similar model of including government, business and civil society. However this has not applied in all areas. It should ensure that when it provides support and/or funding for events that could lead to policy on this issue they ensure that NGOs are adequately represented in the debates and discussions.

2.7 For the UK’s policies to support both land restitution in Colombia and UK business to be consistent and promote the protection of human and environmental rights, it will be essential for the Embassy, UK Government and companies to ensure that they are not investing on tracts of land which may have been made available to investment through the forced displacement of civilians living on and using the land. Companies operating in Colombia need to be taking proactive measures to ensure that they do not benefit, knowingly or unknowingly, from human rights abuses.

2.8 Businesses can have an impact on almost all human rights. Therefore, it is essential to have a smart mix of legal and voluntary mechanisms. Whilst voluntary measures and principles such as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) have served to raise standards due to their role in pushing incremental improvements, a major negative impact has been that they have undermined attempts to develop effective legal sanction, both at national and international level, without which it is not possible to prevent companies abusing the rights of local communities. The UN Framework makes it clear that there is a responsibility upon States to set out clearly the expectation that companies domiciled in their territory or jurisdiction respect human rights throughout their operations.

3.0 Recommendations for the Committee to consider for inclusion in its report to the House.

To recommend that:

3.1 the FCO incorporates into its next quarterly report on Colombia a more detailed analysis of the situation of human rights defenders. Given the deterioration of the situation with 69 defenders killed in 2012 which has more than doubled in two years (32 killed, 2010).

3.2 the UK/DTI and BIS liaise closely with those in the government working on Colombia and human rights when promoting trade, to ensure that the principle of not downgrading human rights to trade is upheld. It should avoid promoting trade that requires land use in Colombia until land restitution to Colombia’s victims has been completed.

3.3 The PSVI should ensure that funding to women’s organisations and NGOs working on conflict related sexual violence is not conditioned on working in partnership with national governments.

3.4 the UK Strategy on Business and human Rights has a smart mix of legal and voluntary mechanisms in order to comply with the States responsibility to protect human rights.

4.0 Countries of Concern – Colombia

4.1 ABColombia welcomes the inclusion of Colombia as a country of concern and agrees with the structural problems outlined in the FCO Human Rights and Democracy Report 2012, including the ongoing conflict, impunity, the need for land restitution, as well as the serious threats faced by human rights defenders and people who have raised concerns about business activities in rural areas.

4.2 There is also a lack of analysis regarding the deterioration of the situation for human rights defenders and community leaders: with 69 being killed in 2012 this has more than doubled in two years (32 were killed in 2010). [3] This represents a major challenge to democracy. Any sustainable peace has to have a firm democratic foundation built on respect for human rights and the work and protection of defenders are key to establishing this.

4.3 What we consider missing from the analysis is the continued existence and activities of the paramilitaries in Colombia (usually referred to by the Colombian Government as Criminal Gangs – BACRIM). Paramilitaries are one of the major obstacles to peace in Colombia as well as being one of the major violators of human rights.

4.4 Whilst we would like to see more done, we recognise that the British Embassy in Colombia plays an important role and often a leading role amongst European Embassies in promoting human rights. Of particular note is the Embassy’s work monitoring and taking actions with respect to human rights defender David Ravelo Crespo (who has been imprisoned and condemned without respect to due process) and regarding Curvaradó and Jiguamiandó communities (where there have been killings and disappearances of community leaders working on land restitution). These and other actions have been crucial and will continue to be so in defence of human rights.

4.5 in addition to the key challenges raised by the FCO report, we would add: ending paramilitarism which continues to operate with alleged links to the security forces; establishing a framework for peace that includes victims’ rights to truth, justice and reparation; ensuring changes to the Military Justice System which do not conform to international standards are not implemented; that policies for protection of human rights defenders are implemented effectively; and ensuring the implementation of UN Resolutions 1325 and 1820, and policies designed to prevent and/or prosecute conflict related sexual violence.

4.6 The humanitarian crisis in Colombia is frequently overlooked. Colombia currently has the highest number of internally displaced peoples in the world (5.5 million), according to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre. In 2012 approximately 230,000 people were forced to flee their homes. Among internally displaced peoples, 94 per cent live in poverty and 77 per cent in extreme poverty. [4]

4.7 There are a series of major challenges to the implementation of the Victims and Land Restitution Law, including security and sustainability for those returning. Whilst there is an initial start up grant for victims to assist in their return, there is a lack of a concrete plan of sustainable support; and the National Development Plan (NDP) lacks a major strategy to facilitate small scale agriculture and rural livelihoods. Here the UK could be proactive in getting the EU to maintain a broad funding stream for small scale livelihoods and farming; this approach to supporting the victims would also contribute to a sustainable peace process.

5. G8 Declaration and the Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative (PSVI)

5.1 Both the G8 declaration and the PSVI are really welcome initiatives by the UK Government. Consultation with women’s groups, INGOs and NGOs in the UK, as well as debates in parliament, meant that the priorities for the G8 Declaration on preventing sexual violence have a strong basis now for the work that needs to be undertaken. We particularly welcome the inclusion of risks faced by women human rights defenders working in this area.

5.2 Colombia, according to the Constitutional Court has a systematic but hidden problem of conflict related sexual violence. The UK’s of a team of experts on sexual violence in conflict violence could be a useful resource in this context given that an important focus of the PSVI is tackling impunity and creating access to justice.

5.5 It is therefore important to focus on how cases get to court, particularly when security forces are involved in this practice. Difficulties in reporting these crimes is likely to be further compounded by the progress of new legislation reinforcing the Military Justice System, which consolidates the involvement of the security forces in deciding if a case will be investigated by the military or civil justice system. Our experience in Colombia is that the women, who have managed to report sexual violence crimes, have only done so when they have been in contact with women’s organisations. Therefore, to enable cases to get into the justice system it will be essential for the UK to prioritise funding for women’s organisations working at the grassroots level who are documenting cases, bringing them to court, and providing psychosocial and other support systems.

5.6 Over recent years our partners in Colombia have raised their concerns that the funding provided via the British Embassy has increasingly emphasised working in partnership with the Colombian government. Funding to women’s organisations and NGOs working on conflict related sexual violence should not be conditioned on working in partnership with national governments. The emphasis on this has excluded many human rights organisations from applying to the UK Embassy (in Colombia) for funding.

6.0 Business and Human Rights

6.1 We welcome the efforts made by the UK Government to consult civil society on its strategy for the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, and its support to other countries to do the same. Given that the UK strategy will not be out until later in the year it is not possible to comment on how the recommendations by civil society have been incorporated into that strategy. However, we would like to comment on some of the key aspects we would expect to see in a business and human rights strategy.

6.2 The UK Government’s consultation for this strategy included business, academics and CSOs, which was a useful model. The UK Embassy in Colombia appears to have adopted the same model of involving government, experts and civil society/NGOs in the consultation on designing a strategy. However, when it comes to incorporating civil society’s voice in key discussions on policy and in arenas which influence the formation of policies the UK Embassy has not been proactive in insisting on Colombian civil society participation, even at events that they have funded. This is illustrated by a recent high level conference on the implementation of UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the Voluntary Principles on Human Rights and Security to feed into Colombian Government policy; the UK Embassy funded this two day conference. There was participation from only one Colombian CSO and no participation on the panels by indigenous and minority groups. In addition, CSOs would have been excluded from participating due to the incredibly high cost of attending.

6.4 The exclusion of indigenous and minority groups from this conference is of particular concern given that the FCO Human Rights Report 2012 states that ‘poor business practices can have a significant detrimental impact on these [indigenous] communities’. This is particularly the case in respect to mining and infrastructure. Mining is a key area of UK investment in Colombia. The British government is also heavily involved in promoting business opportunities for UK companies in infrastructure. This can be seen in that a stated goal of the UK Trade Department is for UK companies to win at least five £75m infrastructure contracts in Colombia. [5] To comply fully with the UN Guiding Principles, the UK must do more to promote engagement with local NGOs to ensure more effective due diligence and the prevention of business related human rights violations. This includes consultation with NGOs around impact assessment procedures, working in conflict-affected areas, and in design and performance of grievance mechanisms.

6.5 For the UK’s policies to support both land restitution in Colombia and UK business to be consistent and promote the protection of human and environmental rights, it will be essential for the Embassy, UK Government and companies to ensure that they are not investing on tracts of land which may have been made available to investment through the forced displacement of civilians living on and using the land. Companies operating in Colombia need to be taking proactive measures to ensure that they do not benefit, knowingly or unknowingly, from human rights abuses.

6.6 One of the key findings of John Ruggie, UN Secretary General’s Special Representative for Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises, was that businesses can have an impact on almost all human rights. Therefore, it is essential to have a smart mix of legal and voluntary mechanisms. Whilst voluntary measures and principles such as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) are essential for guiding companies, and have served to raise standards due to their role in pushing incremental improvements, a major negative impact has been that they have undermined attempts to develop effective legal sanction, both at national and international level, without which it is not possible to prevent companies abusing the rights of local communities. Ruggie highlighted that ‘unless States take appropriate steps to investigate, punish and redress business-related human rights abuses when they do occur, the State duty to protect can be rendered weak or even meaningless.’ [6]

6.7 We would recommend that the UK Government look to extend extra-territorial jurisdiction to cover actions overseas by businesses based in the UK, or by firms operating under contract to the UK Government, which have an impact on human rights. Last year the Foreign Affairs Committee recognised that ‘Relying on local administration of justice may not be enough to preserve the international reputation of the UK for upholding high standards of human rights’ and there was a suggestion to link the provision of ‘Government procurement opportunities, investment support and export credit guarantees to UK businesses’ human rights records overseas’. [7] The recent trend has been towards holding companies liable for offences overseas. For example, the UK recently expanded its extra-territorial jurisdiction to include holding companies liable for bribery offences committed outside the UK (through the Bribery Act 2010).

6.8 The criteria available for extra-territorial jurisdiction include ‘where it appears to be in the interest of the standing and reputation of the UK’; [8] a criterion engaged in relation to the arms trade. We believe the standing and reputation of the UK is affected by unprosecuted violations of human rights by all its companies overseas, not just companies involved in the arms trade.

6.9 There is a responsibility upon States to set out clearly the expectation that companies domiciled in their territory or jurisdiction respect human rights throughout their operations. Clarity of the State’s expectations is essential for businesses in order that they can ensure their compliance. One area where clarity could be improved is on making reporting mechanisms robust. Particular provision within human rights reporting (under the Companies Act 2006) could be given to making it mandatory to report on engagement and consultation processes in Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ territory [9] due to the serious potential consequences of resource extraction on their culture and way of life. Corporations should be required to provide detailed reporting on how they have complied with this process.

24 May 2013

---

[1] Informe Anual de 2012, Somos Defensores, April 2013

[2] FCO Human Rights and Democracy Programme Funding .

[3] Informe Anual de 2012, Somos Defensores, April 2013

[4] Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, ‘ Global Overview 2012, April 2013

[5] UK Government, ‘Increasing the quantity and range of UK-Colombia trade’, 21 March 2013

[6] Business and Human Rights: Mapping International Standards of Responsibility and Accountability for Corporate Acts, Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, UN Document A/HRC/4/035 (19 February 2007)

[7] Foreign Affairs Committee, Third Report of Session 2012–13, 11 September 2012 session

[8] Ibid

[9] In the case of Colombia Afro-Colombians are included under the ILO Convention 169.