EL ESPECTADOR

The Staggering Toll Of An Anniversary Colombia Would Rather Forget

Nearly three decades after a bloodbath between guerrillas and the government, prison sentences, judicial expenses, and international prosecutions are costing the country dearly.

Bogota's new Palace of Justice
Bogota's new Palace of Justice
Alexander Marín Correa

BOGOTA — Twenty-eight years to the day after one of Colombia’s worst tragedies — a politically-inspired bloodbath between leftist guerrillas and the government — the country has yet to fully reckon with the two-day assault that has become a neverending financial burden, for damages incurred and compensations claimed, that has been draining the public purse for nearly three decades.

It was Nov. 7, 1985, when Colombian soldiers stormed the seat of the Supreme Court in Bogotá to recover the building from rebels. A day before, the Palace of Justice had been taken over by 35 members of the M-19, a leftist guerrilla force formed in the 1970s that demanded a trial for then-President Belisario Betancur. They accused the president of interrupting a tentative peace process between the state and the M-19. They took 300 jurists and judges hostage, and Betancur decided to let the army handle the situation. Troops stormed the Palace, and more than 100 people died, including some guerrillas and many magistrates they had taken hostage. Eleven people were declared missing.

No authority has an exact account of the costs to Colombia to date, but estimates place it around $525 million. This includes the cost of the court’s reconstruction, compensation payments, and the cost to the judiciary of various cases —and now that of defending the State before international bodies. The bill may yet increase.

The Inter-American Court Of Human Rights is currently processing a victims' claim worth more than $26 million, and there will be more costs if investigations ordered to ascertain the possible responsibilities of uniformed agents and certain ministers working then in fact proceed.

Reconstruction and other costs

The biggest expense linked to the assault so far has been the rebuilding of the Palace of Justice between 1986 and 1999. Experts have suggested a reconstruction cost equivalent in today’s dollars of over $263 million — excluding rents paid or furniture bought in those years to allow the higher courts to keep working.

With rulings that began to be issued in the mid-1990s, an arbitration body called the State Council determined that the Colombian government was administratively responsible for the massacre, in part for failing to protect its magistrates. And while fewer than half the 100 families affected by the tragedy have taken the State to court, the ones who have have generally been successful.

Analyst Alfredo Rangel counts 45 sentences issued against the government, with more than 100 people receiving an average compensation of 1,000 grams of gold for moral damages. Various sums have been paid for material damages incurred. The relatives of one judge killed in the assault, for example, received the equivalent of $525,000.

Then there have been the costs of military court proceedings dealing with disciplinary or criminal offenses, and the money spent on teams of experts hired to discover the truth, in vain.

And now international prosecution

Official contracts show the State has so far spent more than $789,000 since relatives of those missing after the assault took their cases to international courts. A big chunk of the money has gone to lawyers, the first of whom, Jorge Enrique Ibáñez Najar, signed two contracts in 2008 and 2010 worth more than $110,000.

He was the country’s defense attorney in May last year when Colombia was notified that the case would be referred to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. He resigned three months later, and five days before the deadline for responding to the notice from the court, Colombia hired Rafael Nieto Loaiza, whose contract cost more than $213,000. Nieto's answer to the court failed to acknowledge those who were missing after the two-day assault, a move that proved disastrous.

The State had to liquidate his contract, then hired an advisory committee of six lawyers, paying each of them a little under $23,000 for a month’s work. They had to decide whether it was advisable for the government to accept responsibility for the missing, for which they charged over $135,000. Accepting their opinion, the Colombia Defense Agency chose Julio Andrés Sampedro Arrubia, a committee member, as the new defense attorney. He signed a contract for almost $86,000, while a substitute defense attorney also hired was paid the same sum. Legal fees since the country was notified about the international court proceedings total $631,000.

It doesn’t look like this tap will stop leaking any time soon. Criminal lawsuits over the missing are proceeding, state prosecutors want to dig up the past to uncover officials’ presumed responsibility, and more relatives are set to sue the State. To cap it off, officials predict condemnation by the international court is imminent.

You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Stories from the best international journalists.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
Already a subscriber? Log in
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
Society

How The Top Collector Of Chinese Art Evades Censors In New Hong Kong Museum

Swiss businessman Uli Sigg is the most important collector of Chinese contemporary art. In 2012, he gave away most of his collection to the M+ in Hong Kong. Now the museum has opened as the Communist Party is cracking down hard on freedom of expression. So how do you run a museum in the face of widespread censorship from Beijing?

''Rouge 1992'' by Li Shan at the M+ museum

Maximilian Kalkhof

The first test has been passed, Uli Sigg thinks. So far, everything has gone well. His new exhibition has opened, visitors like to come, and — this is the most important thing for the Swiss businessman — everything is on display. He has not had to take an exhibit off the list of works.

The M+ in Hong Kong is a new museum that wants to compete with the established ones. It wants to surpass the MoMa in New York and Centre Pompidou in Paris. Sigg, a rather down-to-earth man, says: “There is no better museum in the whole world.” That is very much self-praise, since Sigg’s own collection is central to the museum.

The only problem is: great art is often political; it questions the rulers. Since the Chinese Communist Party has been cracking down on critics and freedom in Hong Kong, the metropolis is a bad place for politics and art. So how did the collection get there?

Keep reading... Show less
Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Stories from the best international journalists.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
Already a subscriber? Log in
THE LATEST
FOCUS
TRENDING TOPICS
MOST READ