Amicus Curiae Brief to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Bedoya Lima et al. v. Colombia

Summary of the case

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights submitted Jineth Bedoya Lima’s case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2019. Bedoya, a female Colombian journalist covering the armed conflict in Colombia, was kidnapped, tortured, and raped by paramilitary groups who targeted her as a journalist. The Commission submitted that the Colombian State failed to “adopt adequate and timely measures” to protect Lima and prevent the human rights violations from taking place, and the Inter-American Court considered her case in 2021. [1]

Objectives of the amicus

The amicus aims to contribute to the jurisprudence on sexual violence in armed conflict and endorse reparation standards that respond to the needs of victims. Focusing on the case of Bedoya Lima And Another vs. Colombia and the armed conflict in Colombia, the amicus examines the effects of sexual violence on victims in the context of armed conflict. 

A key objective of the amicus is to present considerations on the obligations of states to: 

1) Investigate, prosecute, and punish sexual violence and 

2) Offer remedy or reparations to victims of sexual violence. 

To this end, the amicus presents international standards for reparations; the legal and administrative framework for reparations to victims of the armed conflict in Colombia; and parameters for a holistic, transformative approach to reparations. 

Key findings

Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict

The amicus examines the international and Inter-American jurisprudence on sexual violence in the context of armed conflict. In particular, it highlights the widespread and systematic nature of sexual violence in conflict, which perpetrators inflict with the intent not only to degrade victims but also to terrorize communities and weaken the enemy. The amicus also underscores the particular vulnerability of members of certain civilian groups, such as journalists, to sexual violence in armed conflict. Turning to the case of Jineth Bedoya Lima, the amicus calls attention to the decision by the Attorney General’s Office declaring the case a crime against humanity, which held that “that the attack on the journalist is part of a systematic and generalized attack” against journalists. 

The amicus also highlights the long-term adverse consequences for those affected by sexual violence, including physical consequences such as sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancies; psychological trauma; fear, anxiety, and insecurities in the exercise of their sexuality and when entering new romantic relationships; intergenerational harm; and revictimization in the criminal process. Importantly, the amicus emphasizes, consequences are both individual and collective. Effective reparations must therefore address both individual and collective harms, including the “systematic forgetting” or collective amnesia that often accompanies instances of widespread sexual violence in armed conflict. 

States’ obligations in cases of sexual violence

The amicus focuses on states’ obligations under UN Resolution 60/147 to "investigate violations effectively, quickly, completely and impartially” and “provide victims with effective remedies, including reparation.” [2]

Obligations of the state to investigate, prosecute, and punish acts of sexual violence

In the case of Jineth Bedoya Lima, the amicus argues, a number of irregularities in the investigation process exposed “a legal regime that was discriminatory regarding gender, and eminently negligent in the investigation of acts of violence against women.” These irregularities include a lack of investigation into the threats paramilitary groups made against Jineth Bedoya, the absence of a comprehensive research plan, the absence of informal investigation, missing evidence, omissions in the collection of important evidence, the use of discriminatory stereotypes during the investigation, excessive delays in the criminal process, and a lack of investigation into the participation of state agents. 

Obligations of the state to provide victims with reparations

Drawing from the UN Basic Principles and Guidelines, the General Comment No. 3 of the UN Committee against Torture, and the jurisprudence of key international bodies and courts, the amicus articulates international standards for reparations for victims of sexual violence and articulates a holistic approach to reparations. Examining the ICC, the African Charter on Human and People's Rights of 1981, and the European human rights system, the amicus highlights how each system has enshrined – or, in the case of the European human rights system, introduced measures to better protect – the right to transformative, collective, comprehensive reparations for victims. 

Turning to Colombia, the amicus presents the existing reparations measures and evaluates their efficiency, transparency, and effectiveness. Concluding that the regulatory framework established by the Colombian state to protect victims of sexual violence “does not represent true guarantees, nor does it provide de facto protection for victims,” the amicus argues that Jineth Bedoya’s case presents the Court with an opportunity to adopt a better approach to damage repair. A holistic approach would offer medical, psychological, social and economic care; include a transformative aspect that addresses the long-term consequences of sexual violence; and provide means to heal individual, collective, and intergenerational trauma. Finally, the amicus presents findings from SAHR’s workshop on Tactical Approaches on Combating Sexual Violence and offers recommendations to the Inter-American Court.

Recommendations 

SAHR urged the Inter-American Court:

• To acknowledge that the case of Jineth Bedoya is part of a systematic pattern in which sexual violence was used as a weapon of war.
  

• To evaluate the extent of the damage suffered by the victims, including damage to their life plans, transgenerational damage, or damage suffered by family or community members.
  

• To take into consideration the societal damages generated by acts of sexual violence, torture, and kidnapping, especially the adverse effects on the exercise of freedom of expression.
  

• To recognize the importance of memory and resignification measures, alongside traditional reparation measures, to defend against collective amnesia of sexual violence.
  

• To determine whether the legislation, public policies, and strategies adopted by the Colombian State effectively guarantee the rights of the victims in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the reparation measures and identify implementation problems and obstacles.
  

• To recognize the systematic nature of sexual violence and adopt structural measures from which the other victims that Jineth represents, and future generations, can benefit.
  

• To incorporate recommendations on the classification of damages; gender- and victim-centered approaches; transformative reparations; and the specificity of measures.

[1] Bedoya Lima et al. v. Colombia, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, judgment of August 26, 2021. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_431_ing.pdf

[2] General Assembly. Basic principles and guidelines on the right of victims of gross violations of international human rights standards and serious violations of international humanitarian law to seek remedies and obtain reparations. Resolution 60/147 approved on December 16, 2005.