00:00Is it true that Colombia is withdrawing from the International Criminal Court? And is it true that the
00:04The ICC could investigate her for the bombings in the Caribbean or for the recognition of the
00:10The Golan Heights in relation to Israel? All of this is answered with a legal analysis.
00:16of considerable technical detail. First, it's not true that this happened. There isn't even
00:22the moment a test that the president of the Republic, the chancellor or the ambassador
00:27of Colombia in The Hague, have issued an official communication in which the State of Colombia
00:33withdraw from the ICC. This requires a rather technical and regulated procedure before the Secretariat.
00:41of the International Criminal Court in The Hague. This has not happened. Furthermore, if hypothetically
00:48If this were done, the ICC would have jurisdiction to investigate any act, even if committed
00:54up to a year after the resignation. Second, there are at least four very strict filters
01:01major events that would have to occur for the ICC to hypothetically investigate something related to
01:08Colombia. First, note that the ICC does not investigate states, so it wouldn't investigate Colombia. The ICC
01:17It investigates people, natural persons with names and surnames. Second, the ICC only handles crimes.
01:27International, it does not handle all types of crime. According to its statutes, they must be
01:34First, war crimes, that is, very serious violations committed in the context of a conflict
01:41Non-international armed conflict or an international armed conflict. Violations of international law
01:48Humanitarian. That's not the case here. Second, crimes against humanity. Extremely serious violations of the
01:55The most fundamental human rights. But not just any rights. They have to be systematic violations.
02:02They have to be large-scale, massive violations. They have to be directed against
02:09a particular and specific population and must be committed within the framework of a policy of
02:16State. This does not occur in the hypothetical cases either. Third, a genocide, that is, the extermination
02:25completely of an entire race, of an entire people, as happened in the so-called Nazi Holocaust.
02:34This is not the case. And also events of aggression, which is prohibited.
02:38Military intervention in the affairs of another state. So here, while there are crimes that
02:45They are sensitive issues for society; they are not international crimes that, in principle, would be considered
02:51the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. On the other hand, it turns out that this Court does not investigate
02:59any international crime, but its jurisdiction only functions in a way that
03:06Supplementary material. For this, read the chapter from a book I wrote when I worked in
03:12The International Criminal Court, which explains precisely the principle of complementarity.
03:18What does this principle mean? It means that crimes must be investigated initially.
03:24It is the competent State, the State where they occurred or the State from which the victims come.
03:30The ICC only intervenes in a subsidiary, complementary manner. When? When the State that
03:38The original competition either didn't want to investigate or couldn't. Here in Colombia, that doesn't happen.
03:46Principle of complementarity. Why? Because the ICC itself certified that Colombia had a system
03:54solid judicial system and therefore the ICC would not have the power to assist the Colombian jurisdiction.
04:02This is the ICC's remaining work. And finally, note that for the ICC to initiate an investigation
04:08With respect to a natural person, a situation must first be opened. Situations
04:16who investigates a situational or geographical context and within it then decides to identify people
04:25Specifically. There are currently four open cases on the ICC website, and Colombia is not among them.
04:32Colombia was involved a few years ago, but the situation in Colombia was closed more than four years ago.
04:39Therefore, it is practically impossible today, under the current conditions at the time of recording.
04:45This video suggests that the ICC could investigate a Colombian citizen. Finally, would this be advisable?
04:52The answer is no. It would be very inconvenient. Why? It would isolate the Colombian state from
05:00multilateral scenario. Colombia is not the United States, it is not a superpower, and it depends on multilateralism.
05:08and the maintenance of good relations with other states. This would generate a loss of
05:14It would affect investor confidence, merchant confidence, and would also have an economic impact on the state.
05:21as well as in terms of cooperation. Furthermore, it would also remove a veil of legitimacy from the
05:28Colombian justice and at least the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, which today operates by mandate
05:35constitutional. So it's not true, even if Colombia were to withdraw, it would be very unfeasible.
05:41that there could be investigations in Colombia and third, it would be very inconvenient.
Comentarios