Alternative Sanctions before the Special Jurisdiction for Peace: Reflections on International Law and Transitional Justice
By Luke Moffett, Cheryl Lawther, Kieran McEvoy, Clara Sandoval and Peter Dixon (Reparations Team)
As part of our fieldwork in Colombia and support of the GCRF Impact Accelerator Award we have been engaging with the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) on its alternative sanctions regime and the role of reparations.
As part of this engagement we have prepared a report that pulls together some of the international jurisprudence and state practice on the legality and substance of the alternative sanctions regime. This report approaches these issues under four headings: restorative justice; victim participation; international standards on sentencing; and alternative sanctions, reparations and accountability.
While there are a number of cases already before the JEP, the alternative sanctions regime has yet to be implemented. Importantly the restorative and victim-centred approach of the JEP represents a unique opportunity to broaden the notions of criminal trials in meting out proportional punishments that can more adequately respond to victims’ interests and contribute to a more holistic understanding of redress that includes truth recovery, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence. This report hopes to contribute to these debates and provides some preliminary recommendations in moving forward with alternative sanctions.