Legal Pluralism, Transitional Justice, and Ethnic Justice Systems

Abstract

Colombian law recognizes that traditional Indigenous and Black authorities can exercise legal jurisdiction and apply their laws and traditions in their ancestral territories. Despite this legal recognition, the legal system does not operate in a way that genuinely guarantees legal pluralism. In practice, higher courts repeatedly overturn or dismiss decisions by indigenous legal authorities.
 As a result of the 2016 Peace Agreement between the Colombian Government and the former guerilla of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – The People’s Army (“FARC-EP” in Spanish), a transitional justice tribunal was established: the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (“SJP” or “the Special Jurisdiction”). The Special Jurisdiction’s main task is to investigate and try the most serious crimes committed during the armed conflict, a conflict that has disproportionately impacted racialized communities. The SJP, unlike other tribunals in Colombia, has sought to adapt its work to meet the reality of legal pluralism by: 1) negotiating protocols for inter-jurisdictional interaction between the SJP and ethnic authorities, 2) consulting with Indigenous and Black communities on the adoption of some legal instruments, and 3) having a dialogue between equals with ethnic authorities when potential jurisdictional conflicts arise. This paper seeks to analyze this interaction and how it has allowed the Special Jurisdiction, as transitional justice mechanism, to work in close cooperation with Indigenous and Black communities in Colombia. As will be discussed throughout this paper, through the lens of the legal pluralism framework, such interaction has strengthened the legitimacy and recognition of Indigenous and Black communities’ legal authorities as parallel legal orders that can operate side-by-side with the State judicial system. This, in turn, has created an important precedent that can be emulated by other court jurisdictions in Colombia and elsewhere.