Ms Mariela Kohon:

I will add to the tribute paid to Fórsa for supporting the peace monitor delegations. One feature of the delegations is that they meet everyone. I recognise the Government for having engaged with the delegations, the embassy in London and the Minister's meeting at the highest level. It is incredibly valued that this engagement has taken place and it gives credibility to the delegation that it is meeting everyone, including JEP, the UN, the institutions and the parties.

There are concerns about the impact of extractive industries on the environment - and we heard about the mine - and that licences given should respect the indigenous land that is constitutionally provided for. There are campaigns about fracking and obvious concern about the possible fumigation of crops with glyphosate, which is incredibly toxic.

On the elections, having international observers is incredibly important but one of the concerns is that sometimes they come the day before the election. The problem in Colombia is not just about the day of the election; it is about what happens before the election. It is about the violence and intimidation that comes in the build-up to an election. The electoral observation mission released a report at the end of May that states that since last October five mayoral candidates and two aspiring council members were among the 75 registered political assassinations and that 37 political activists had survived an assassination attempt. The elections come in the context of what has happened before and attention needs to be put on this issue. Perhaps some monitoring should be done at that stage. It will be the first time FARC will participate in local elections and it will be quite exposed. This will be very difficult. The EU has sent observers to previous elections and it will be important to see what type of monitoring can take place. The UN mission has a mandate to verify the political reincorporation of FARC and it will monitor the situation.

With regard to collusion, the killings of members of FARC vary. In some cases, they have directly involved the army, such as the case of Dimar Torres. Other cases involve the ELN or paramilitary groups perhaps linked to dissidents. It is complex and depends on the region. Some of them were clearly politically motivated while the reasons for others are unclear. What is important is that where there has been state involvement, those involved are brought to justice.

As part of the peace agreement, a special investigative unit is supposed to be established to dismantle and investigate paramilitaries. There was a huge back and forth with the former attorney general over this unit because the whole point of the unit was to be completely autonomous but it had to be created within the office of the attorney general because of his opposition to it. It is important to support the autonomy of the unit to investigate and dismantle paramilitary groups.

There was supposed to be a political pact throughout the country to take violence out of politics and change the hate. The JEP has a role in terms of the reconciliation. One key feature of the peace agreement is that it is comprehensive and interlinked. If we start chipping away and taking bits then other bits will not work. We have to implement it as a whole. If FARC members do not have legal guarantees, why would they offer the truce? The government needs to see the agreement as a whole.

I reiterate what Mr. Callinan said about hosting both parties. Any opportunity for signatories to the agreement to be recognised as such and to give their views would be very valuable.