The Virtual Human Rights Lawyer - Namibia Pilot

PILPG Netherlands, the Legal Assistance Centre (LAC) from Namibia, and Intercidadania from Brazil, are working together on the design and development of the ‘Virtual Human Rights Lawyer’ (VHRL). This tool will be the outcome of an innovative project that combines several disciplines and areas of knowledge, such as IT, international and Namibian law and communications to support victims of human rights violations.

The VHRL is a tool that aims to provide victims of human rights violations with a platform to inquire which judicial and non-judicial mechanisms are available in their situation. The VHRL will take the form of a ‘chatbot’ based on specific decision trees that guide the user from his or her legal issue to the appropriate mechanism.

Jasmijn de Zeeuw

The pilot version of the chatbot will be designed for Namibia in cooperation with the Legal Assistance Centre in Windhoek, Namibia. Jasmijn de Zeeuw, a senior research associate at PILPG Netherlands, worked as a legal intern at the LAC for the past six months and initiated the partnership. She recently gave a seminar to the PILPG team on the background of the organization and the advantages of doing the pilot in Namibia.

The LAC was founded in 1988 and is the largest NGO working on the protection of human rights in Namibia. The organization works on public interest cases, particularly in the area of human rights, political and civil rights, but also cultural, economic and social rights. Among the most addressed issues are discrimination and violations of land rights. The organization works for example with the San people in respect to their ancestral land rights.

Next to being an exciting, young, and dynamic country, Namibia also presents a good pilot project. Namibia has the size of Spain and France combined but only 2.6 million inhabitants, thus a very low population density. Having been a former colony of Germany and South Africa, the inhabitants experience strong inequalities. The country’s GINI coefficient is 59.1 with a disproportionately wealthy white elite.

For the problems arising from these inequalities, and other human rights violations experienced by Namibians, the VHRL aims to provide easy and accessible support for the victims. About 45% of the population owns a mobile phone and Namibia’s mobile phone network coverage amounts to 95%, therefore the VHRL can be used by a substantive part of the population.

Follow this blog to stay up-to-date on our project! If you're interested in more information or want to help collaborate with us on this initiative, you can reach out to us at ggricius@pilpg.org.

To Be Genocide or Not to Be Genocide, That Is the Question

BY: PHEDRA NEEL, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, PILPG-NL

DURING THE HUMAN RIGHTS WEEKEND ORGANIZED BY HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH AND DE BALIE, THE DOCUMENTARY ‘ON HER SHOULDERS’ WAS SHOWN. THIS FILM DRAWS ATTENTION TO NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER NADIA MURAD AND HER FIGHT FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE YAZIDI GENOCIDE. THE YAZIDI ARE A RELIGIOUS MINORITY THAT WAS ATTACKED BY ISIS. THIS BLOG POST REFLECTS ON THIS FIGHT AND CONSIDERS EXPLANATIONS WHY SOME MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ARE RELUCTANT TO USE THE WORD ‘GENOCIDE’.

Between the 7th and 10th February 2019, Human Rights Watch organized, in cooperation with De Balie, the seventh edition of the Human Rights Weekend. This year’s topic was “Where do I stand” and invited the attendees to think about how they are (in)directly involved in human rights violations and how they can contribute in ending these violations. The program consisted of masterclasses, lectures, and documentaries. One of these documentaries showed the incredible story of Nadia Murad. Nadia is a Yazidi girl, who witnessed her community being murdered by ISIS. She was later captured herself and forced to become a sex slave. Today she is known as the most recent Nobel peace Prize winner for her global advocacy campaign to fight for the rights of the Yazidi. This campaign consists of addressing heads of states and governments, asking for help for the survivors and for the attack on her people to be considered as genocide. Whereas some states have indeed passed legislation that recognizes the events as genocide, others refuse to do so until the United Nations (UN) itself officially uses the word genocide to describe the atrocities. 

The Yazidi are a religious minority living in small communities in the Sinjar region in Northern Iraq. According to Nadia herself, they have allegedly endured 74 genocides, the latest one being executed by ISIS. On August 3, 2014, ISIS invaded Sinjar and destroyed whole villages. They lined up the men and executed them, they killed the elderly women and forced all girls above the age of nine to become sex slaves. All boys under the age of twelve were trained to join the fighting brigades of ISIS. In Nadia Murad’s village, Kocho, only fifteen men survived the attack. Other villages suffered the same brutality or are still suffering, as around 3000 girls are still believed to be sex slaves. 

In June 2016, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, a UN inquiry mission, claimed that ISIS was committing a genocide against the Yazidi. The Chair, Paulo Pinheiro, emphasized that genocide has occurred and that it is ongoing. According to Commissioner Carla Del Ponte, “ISIS has subjected every Yazidi woman, child or man that it has captured to the most horrific of atrocities. […] ISIS has made no secret of its intent to destroy the Yazidis of Sinjar, and that is one of the elements that allowed us to conclude their actions amount to genocide”. 

Even though the UN experts have stated that these events qualify as genocide, the UN as such has not used this term in a definite manner. What it has done, however, is adopt a United Nations Security Council Resolution in September 2017, which established an investigative team in order to document the atrocities and to hold the perpetrators responsible. This team, after a year of talks with Baghdad to secure its cooperation, will start its operations in 2019. However, it is yet to adopt a Resolution defining the events as a genocide.

Some states decided to act before the UN and passed national legislation to qualify the atrocities as genocide. According to the Times of Israel, the United States House of Representatives passed a motion deeming the mass killings to be a genocide in March 2016. This was followed by the Scottish Parliament and the British House of Commons in April 2016, Canada in October 2016, France in December 2016, and Armenia in 2017. Others however, refuse to do so until the UN officially declares the atrocities a genocide.  

Why is it that the UN has failed to declare the atrocities as genocide, and are states seemingly waiting for the UN to act first? The word ‘genocide’ is a legal concept defined by article 2 of the 1948 Genocide Convention 1948. The following articles of the Convention create obligations for the states parties to the Convention, calling on them to adopt legislation, try the perpetrators, provide effective penalties, among other legal obligations. In other words, calling a situation a genocide also means activating legal obligations under the Genocide Convention.  

Secondly, genocide is a heavily loaded term that plays a strong role in international relations. If you call a country out for genocide, it is very likely that the diplomatic ties between the two concerned states will be broken or will be, at the very least, strained. For example, several countries refuse to recognize the Armenian genocide in an attempt to keep friendly relations with Turkey.

Lastly, genocide is sometimes called the crime of all crimes. If a country admits that a genocide is taking place or has been taking place, then that country admits that it, as a member of the international community, has failed to prevent the most serious international crime from taking place and that it has failed to protect international peace and security.

Therefore, the United Nations does not use the term lightly and it is most likely awaiting the findings of the team now operating in the field, before officially labelling the atrocities as genocide. As long as the United Nations postpones this declaration, countries can hide behind the organization to not risk diplomatic repercussions. This means that the Yazidi will have to wait even longer for their suffering to be recognized as suffering constituting genocide. 

Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes - Introduction

BY CLEO MEINICKE, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE PILPG-NL

“An International Criminal Court is hereby established.
It [...] shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. ”

— ICC Rome Statute Article 1

In October 2018, the Bosnian state court indicted a former soldier of crimes against humanity for his involvement in the murder and enforced disappearance of civilians in the Kljuc area. In September of that year, a German court convicted Ibrahim Al F. for war crimes committed in Syria and in the same month a military tribunal in the Democratic Republic of the Congo found two military commanders guilty of crimes against humanity committed in the villages of Kamananga and Lumenje (South Kivu). These are just three recent examples of domestic efforts in the prosecution of those responsible for international crimes.  

Based on the complementarity principle of the International Criminal Court (ICC), where states are “unwilling or unable” to prosecute international crimes, the ICC may step in to prosecute those most responsible for the commission of the crimes under its jurisdiction, namely genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. However, out of 28 cases before the Court since its inception in 2001 only three resulted in successful convictions.  Several suspects were acquitted after lengthy proceedings, of which Gbagbo and Blé Goudé are the latest examples. Therefore, the ICC should be regarded as a last resort while domestic courts carry the main responsibility to prosecute those responsible for international crimes.

Despite efforts by Bosnia, Germany, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and others, many states around the world do not have the right legislation in place to prosecute international crimes on a domestic level yet and among those that have, many face obstacles and limitations to the actual prosecution of those crimes.  

This blog post is the first in a series of posts elaborating on the domestic prosecutions of international crimes, providing an overview for readers interested in this topic as well as monthly analyses on developments in different regions worldwide. The focus of the blog post series is on the four core crimes that fall under the jurisdiction of the ICC. Other transnational crimes such as terrorism, piracy, or human trafficking may be used as examples of domestic prosecution of international crimes.  

Sources of Jurisdiction for Domestic Courts

Two main events have empowered domestic courts to exercise jurisdiction over international crimes. The first is the emergence of the principle of universal jurisdiction. This principle is based on the notion that any state may exercise jurisdiction over a situation involving crimes considered “to be of extreme gravity and concern the international community.” It emerged after World War II when the international community implemented a large number of international treaties, including the 1949 Geneva Conventions, that enabled states to implement the principle on a domestic level to prosecute genocide and war crimes, for example. The second event was the adoption of the Rome Statute of the ICC that obliges its 124 member states to amend their domestic legislation to be able to prosecute international crimes. Based on the principle of complementarity, the ICC only has jurisdiction over cases where states are unwilling or unable to take action. In the cases touched upon in the introduction, which concern the gravest crimes, the national courts acted based on the universality principle and the Rome Statute.

Even though universal jurisdiction is the most used form of jurisdiction for international crimes, there are other forms of jurisdiction that provide domestic courts with the power to prosecute international crimes, especially those not falling under the Rome Statute. The territoriality principle permits jurisdiction based on where the crime took place. Domestic courts can use this type for example in cases of terrorist attacks if they have been committed on the state’s territory. The active personality principle permits jurisdiction based on the nationality of the perpetrator. Thus, where the perpetrator is a national of a state, that state may prosecute him or her. Alternatively, the passive personality principle allows for a state to claim jurisdiction based on the nationality of the victim. Third, the protective principle bases jurisdiction over a person on the protection of national interests or security even when the person is outside the state’s boundaries. Hence, domestic courts can base jurisdiction on several different principles to prosecute crimes of an international character.

Limitations to the Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes

The prosecution of international crimes domestically is often complicated. Problems occur, for example, when a state has not incorporated the international crimes into its domestic law or does not provide for universal jurisdiction. When a state does have a basis to prosecute international crimes, these cases are often complex and evidence is difficult to obtain from the respective states. Moreover, policy restrictions arise where there is a lack of specialized units or prosecutorial limits. Germany, France and the Netherlands for example have specialized war crimes units that support the investigation of the crimes committed. Lastly, lack of political will limit the success of prosecuting international crimes.

What are the main limitations to domestic prosecution of international crimes in the world? Are there geographical trends in the domestic prosecution of international crimes? In which areas are international crimes included in national legislations?  Were suspects successfully prosecuted? What obstacles do states face? These are just some of the questions that will be addressed in the next blog posts!

February 2019

February 2019 - Southern Cameroons National Council - Introduction

BY PHEDRA NEEL, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE PILPG-NL 

The situation in Southern Cameroons is as dire as it is unknown. The Cameroonian government is fighting groups in the region that it labels “armed separatist groups”. These groups want to establish an independent state called Ambazonia. The resulting violence is causing casualties on both sides.  Civilians see their human rights violated on a large scale. This blog series aims to raise awareness about this situation by regularly discussing specific aspects of the situation or by bringing updates of recent events.

Southern Cameroons and its continuing battle for independence 

Today, the inhabitants of Cameroon are facing multiple challenges. In the north, they are still combating Boko Haram and trying to cope with more than 100.000 Nigerian refugees fleeing the organization. In the east, Cameroon is struggling with the spillover effects from the conflict in the Central African Republic. In the west, the government is fighting what it calls “armed separatist groups”. Two years ago, some of these groups took up arms in their pursuit of an independent Southern Cameroons called ‘Ambazonia’. This claim for independence dates back to the colonial days. 

Following the Treaty of Versailles, the German colony ‘Kamerun’ was divided into a French Trusteeship, now known as the Republic of Cameroon, and a British trusteeship, the Southern Cameroons. After the French trusteeship gained independence in 1960, the British trusteeship was presented with a choice: to join Cameroon or to join Nigeria, another former British trusteeship. Southern Cameroons was thus never given the chance to become truly independent. Southern Cameroons eventually choose to join Cameroon, and Cameroon promised to grant the Southern Cameroonians equal rights in a federal state.

However, Cameroon has not upheld its promises, and undermined the position of the people of Southern Cameroons on multiple occasions. For example, it has forced the people of Southern Cameroons to use the French language in official settings instead of their predominantly native English language. In 2016, the people of Southern Cameroons once again started to protest for more rights, including the right to use English in schools and in courtrooms. The federal government forcefully repressed these protests. As a result, some people of the Southern Cameroons felt that independence would be the only solution. Ever since, violence has become part of everyday life in the region, and is taking a toll on the civilian population. 

Every day, newspapers report about alleged murders, extrajudicial killings, kidnappings, disappearances, dismembered bodies, and shootings. A report produced by humanitarian organizations, including UNICEF and the Human Rights Committee, has shown that the ‘Anglophone crisis’ has left 1.3 million people in need of assistance and 435,500 people internally displaced. About 3,700 unaccompanied minors are in urgent need for psychological care. More than 40 percent of hospitals and health centers no longer provide vaccines, and more than 15 percent of births occur without the presence of trained healthcare professionals. Those who manage to flee the country are not out of harm’s way either.  For example, they live in dire conditions in host communities. Furthermore, 47 Southern Cameroonian leaders are on trial on counts of terrorism. These individuals have been detained since January 2018, after being illegally extradited from Nigeria to Cameroon. While the situation receives more attention from the international community, the prosecutions continue. Their trial has been postponed on numerous occasions, currently until February 20, 2019.

At first, international organizations and states seemed unwilling to interfere or comment on the situation, apart from general calls for peace and sustainable solutions. However, since the elections in October 2018, which were won by Paul Biya – Cameroon’s president since 1982 – some states have started speaking up. For example, the United Kingdom asked for “a peaceful and structured process leading to constitutional reforms” in response to the 2018 election results. This is uncommon, as asking for constitutional reforms is more intrusive than asking for a dialogue. The other former colonizer, Germany, has gone even further than the United Kingdom. Even before the election results were made official, German members of parliament asked the German federal government for action. More specifically, they wanted the Government to offer its services as a mediator in order to start political dialogue; suspend development aid to Cameroon; work together with the EU to encourage dialogue; and bring an end to military cooperation with the Cameroonian government. 

The Unites States of America have reconsidered their assistance to Cameroon. They are still providing assistance in the fight against Boko Haram but are increasingly afraid that their contribution is used in Southern Cameroons. 

Whereas France did not issue a similar statement after the elections, it has spoken on several other occasions. For example, France did speak up whenover 70 students and staff members from a secondary school were kidnapped in November 2018, when a journalist was arrested for accusing the government of being responsible for the death of an American missionary in Southern Cameroons, and when the government arrested opposition leader Maurice Kamto.

However, more concrete action will be needed to pressure the federal government to stop the large scale human rights violations. The United Nations should take action that goes beyond mere condemnations of the violence. For example, the United Nations Human Rights Council could appoint a special rapporteur for the entire territory of Cameroon. Such an appointment could help document the violence, and facilitate negotiations towards a peaceful solution.

At the same time, the international community as a whole could work together to put an end to the violence that is negatively affecting the everyday life of so many individuals. Each of these members has an interest in the stability in the region, andthe power to pressure the Cameroonian government to bring lasting peace. 

February 2019

February 2019 - Domestic Prosecution of International Crimes Update

BY CLEO MEINICKE, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE PILPG-NL

THIS NEWS UPDATE DRAWS TOGETHER INFORMATION FROM DIFFERENT ONLINE NEWS PLATFORMS ON THE TOPIC OF DOMESTIC PROSECUTION OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMES. 

AFRICA

Lybia | Former Ghaddafi official freed in Libya for ‘health reasons’

Buzeid Dorda, a former official of the Libyan leader Muammar Ghaddafi’s regime, who was sentenced to death in 2015, was released Sunday for “health reasons” according to information received from his family. He was sentenced to death for his role in the violent crackdown on protesters. The trial was considered flawed by the United Nations. [February 18, 2019]

Uganda | LRA's Kwoyelo: Lawyers ask court to postpone trial

The commencement of the trial of Mr Thomas Kwoyelo, former Lord’s Resistance Army Commander, was postponed by two weeks for the prosecution to prepare their opening statement. The defendant faces 93 counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes committed between 1995 and 2005. [February 20, 2019]

ASIA

Sri Lanka| Sri Lanka considering withdrawal of co-sponsorship of UNHRC resolution on war crimes

Maithripala Sirisena, the president of Sri Lanka, expressed his wish to withdraw from a Human Rights Council resolution demanding Sri Lanka to address accountability issues and setting up a war crimes tribunal with international participation. A Foreign Ministry source said that the pros and cons of a withdrawal are being discussed. [February 24, 2019]

AUSTRALIA & OCEANIA

Australia | SAS war crimes probe witness disciplined

The Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force has been investigating the conduct of the Special Air Services Regiment and Commandos during the war against the Taliban regarding potential breaches of the laws of armed conflict. The Inspector-General moved to punish a witness, who allegedly breached secrecy provisions of the investigation. [February 2, 2019]

CENTRAL AMERICA/ CARRIBEANS

Guatemala | 'A drastic step backwards': Guatemala considers amnesty for war crimes

Congress will soon vote to reform the national reconciliation law, which may provide absolute immunity to the perpetrators of the crimes committed during the 36-year armed conflict. The crimes committed include rape, forced disappearances and are widely considered crimes against humanity.  [February 7, 2019]

Guatemala | Guatemala war crime survivors challenge amnesty bill

Indigenous survivors of crimes against humanity committed during the civil war take action against the bill advancing immunity for the war criminals. Maya Achi women are among the opposition. They were raped in a military base and would not obtain justice in case of an amnesty bill. [February 14, 2019]                                       

EUROPE

Belgium | Belgian government supports international prosecution for ISIS fighters

The government of Belgium on Thursday wishes the establishment of an international court to prosecute adult Islamic State fighters with Belgian nationality. A report by Metro indicated that the National Security Council in Belgium said an international court should bring to justice all European fighters captured in Iraq. [February 21, 2019]

Bosnia | Bosnian Croat Officer’s Crimes Against Humanity Acquittal Quashed

In May 2018, the state court acquitted Mile Puljic, former commander of the Second Battalion of crimes against humanity committed in the Mostar area in 1993 and 1994. The appeals chamber of the Bosnian state court however ruled in favour of a retrial of the case. [February 8, 2019]

Bosnia | US denounces Bosnian Serb bid to reassess 1990s war crimes

Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik rejects the rulings issued by the ICTY and the ICJ concerning the Srebrenica massacre, which label the incident a genocide. He believes the perspective is exaggerated and the suffering of the Serbs is ignored. Bosnian Serb officials launched new investigations into the atrocities committed in Srebrenica and Sarajevo, which are criticised by the United States. [February 8, 2019]

Bosnia | Eight Persons charged over War Crimes in BiH

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirmed the indictment charging the accused with the criminal offense of war crimes against civilians under Article 142(1) of the Criminal Code of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia (CC SFRY) due to their conduct in violation of international humanitarian law. [February 11, 2019]

Bosnia | Indictment confirmed charging Slobodan Curcic with Crimes against Humanity

On 18 September 2018 the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirmed the indictment charging the accused with violation of international humanitarian law for his conduct as a member of the Serb Republic of BiH forces in July 1992 during their attack against the Bosniak civilian population. [February 23, 2019]

Bosnia | Digital Archive of all Evidence pertaining to War Crimes Cases to be finalized soon? 

The Head of the OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), the President of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) of BiH, and the Chief Prosecutor of the Prosecutor’s Office of BiH signed a Memorandum of Understanding to create an electronic database containing evidence available within the BiH Prosecutor’s Office. This development aims to advance the processing of war crimes cases at the state level. [February 24, 2019]

France | France accuses Syrian suspect of crimes against humanity

Abdulhamid A. is being held in custody on suspicion of partaking in crimes committed by the Syrian government against civilians between 2011 and 2013. The arrest is a result of a joint investigation by French and German investigators. Charges of complicity in crimes against humanity were filed against the suspect. [February 16, 2019]

Germany | Germany arrests two Syrians suspected of crimes against humanity

Two former secret service officers from the Syrian government suspected of carrying out and aiding torture and crimes against humanity were arrested in Germany. The arrests were based on investigations conducted by the European Centre for Constitutional and Human rights (ECCHR) in Berlin. [February 13, 2019]

Kosovo | Kosovo wants abrogation of UNSC Resolution 1244, creation of a war crimes tribunal for Serbia

 Kosovo’s state delegation has created a platform in dialogue with Serbia, which is yet to be confirmed by the Parliament. If endorsed by the members of parliament, the platform terminates UN Security Council Resolution 1244, as well as the creation of a special war crime tribunal dealing exclusively with crimes committed by Serbia in Kosovo. [February 15, 2019]

Netherlands | Israel Asks Dutch Court to Drop War Crimes Case Against Gantz

According to the Justice Ministry, the Israeli government asked to dismiss war crimes allegations against Benny Gantz at a Dutch court. He is charged for his role in an airstrike on a family’s home that killed among others a 72-year-old woman and a 12-year-old child. The strike took place in the war between Israel and Gaza militants in 2014. [February 11, 2019]

Netherlands | Ogoni widows testify at The Hague over Shell's alleged complicity in killings

Shell is accused of complicity in the state execution of nine Ogoni protesters and human rights abuses dating back to 1993 in relation to the oil spilling in the Niger delta. The case was brought by four Ogoni women, who suspect Shell to have been complicit in the brutal crackdown of protests by the government and further human rights abuses. The actions led to the death of the women’s husbands. The case will be decided by a Dutch court. [February 12, 2019]

Sweden | Iraqi man convicted in Sweden of war crimes

An Islamic State fighter, who has posted macabre pictures and videos of himself with corpses on Facebook, has been convicted by a Swedish Court. His conduct was judges to have been “intended to seriously violate personal integrity.” Kurda Bahaalddin H Saeed H Saeed was sentenced to 15 months in jail. [February 19, 2019]

NORTH AMERICA

United States | War crimes trial of Navy SEAL postponed for 3 months

The murder trial of Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher accused of stabbing a war prisoner was postponed. The defense lawyers asked for more time to assess the evidence. Gallagher is accused of killing a teenage Islamic State fighter under his care and then held his re-enlisting ceremony with the corpse. He is further suspected of killing two civilians and shooting into crowds. [February 13, 2019]

United States | FBI is dismantling its war crimes unit

A special unit investigating international war crimes is being dissolved by the FBI. The unit was created to catch Nazis living in the US and has aided for example in the take down of the Liberian warlord Thomas Woewiju. [February 15, 2019]

United States | Naval Special Warfare Command addresses war crimes and other issues in SEAL community

Especially against the background of the trial against Special Operations Chief Edward Gallagher for the commission of war crimes, Rear Admiral Collin Green, commanding officer of the Naval Special Warfare Command, commissioned an internal investigation to determine the reason for such scandals. [February 17, 2019]

SOUTH AMERICA

Colombia | Colombia’s senate president says printer removed victims’ rights from war crimes tribunal bill

 Whereas the Special Jurisdiction for Peace is in force since over a year, the bill regulating the competences of the war crimes tribunal has not been passed through congress. The parts guaranteeing victim’s rights and the duty to contribute to a lasting peace were removed –Senator Ernesto Macias blamed the printer. [February 10, 2019]

Colombia | FARC leader Timochenko first to testify before Colombia’s war crimes tribunal

FARC leader Rodrigo Londoño (Timochenko) is the first to testify before Colombia’s war crimes tribunal (Special Jurisdiction for Peace) to report about his conduct during the armed conflict, especially concerning his involvement in mass kidnapping. He stands trial for the commission of crimes against humanity. His testimony will help to establish a detailed account of the FARC’s kidnapping practices in Colombia. [February 14, 2019]