Mr. Hasan Dodwell:

I thank the Chair. I recognise and respect the work done here to support peace and human rights in Colombia. I follow this closely and I am aware of how many of the members are focused and committed to the issue. This is obviously felt in Colombia. Certainly, the people we work with know about this aspect. Mention was also made of the embassies. We have worked closely and regularly with the Colombian Embassy here, as well as the Irish Embassy in Bogotá. This is an important relationship for us.

Regarding optimism and whether this is evident in Colombia, this is a broad question. One aspect is that the election of President Petro is a shift from normal electoral culture in Colombia and a sign that people wanted to try something new. The existence now of such a broad coalition also shows this shift may extend beyond just the voting base of President Petro and that there is a coming together behind his vision, and not just his vision but that of his government, including Vice President Francia Márquez, and many others. It indicates that this is a time to put a big effort into trying something serious in achieving peace. Many people on the Colombian congressional level, certainly, are behind this effort. It also seems to be attracting much support on a societal level now. Undoubtedly, the effort being made is also recognised within the human rights and peace organisations. It is early days and let us see what happens but I think this optimism is present now. No one, however, is ignorant of the challenges. Many parts of the country - one third is a rough estimate - have no or very little state presence. The state is almost absent and these are the areas where the violence is most predominantly taking place. I am trying to take the queries in order.

Senator Joe O'Reilly referred to there still being hope and worry. No one is unaware of this. Everything being done takes this into consideration. Killings of community activists are still continuing. This is tragic. Justice for Colombia continually raises the voices of those communities to try to increase their protection. We know things are not going to change from one day to the next. We must be aware and prepared for this situation, therefore, while supporting the positive steps being taken.

Moving to the war on drugs, this was also mentioned earlier and I referred to some of the points in this regard a moment ago when responding to Deputy Gannon. On what happens now, as I said, many of the steps needed were contained in the 2016 peace agreement in a chapter on drugs and illicit crops. It has not been implemented as much as it might have been. This does not mean, however, that there is not plenty there to work with. The key element to this, in broad terms, was ending the militarised approach to coca farmers and the growing of the coca crop. I refer to the plant itself. The key initiative here is ending the militarised and criminalised approach towards the coca farmers and recognising the socioeconomic factors at work. This is the core of an alternative and more successful policy on drugs. It would be one which would listen to and follow what the communities themselves are saying, as well as what those working on Colombia concerning these issues are saying.

There is, though, a big "but" here, and this is partly what the Colombian Government is trying to communicate. Changing the policy in Colombia alone is not going to be enough. The question of "what now", therefore, is also about what happens now in the international community and its approach towards the war on drugs and drugs policies. In this context, the question is what changes might be made to assist producer countries to ensure the relationship between drugs and violence comes to an end.

On total peace, some of the information is in the briefing. Mention was already made of the initial talks the high commissioner for peace has been having with different armed groups. A process has been initiated with the ELN, the largest guerrilla group and talks will start at the beginning of November. These will continue from what had previously been negotiated under the Santos Government and during the initial stages of the Duque Government.

The idea of how these talks will continue and exactly what they will look like is still very much to be defined. However, so far, the Government has put out a call to say this is what it wants to do. Many of the armed groups have responded to say they are open to it, they are listening and suggest talking. As I said previously, several ceasefires have already been declared and let us measure this over the next couple of months. There is an initial indication, however, that we may already be starting to see something positive from that. Again, that is not to underplay the ongoing killings that are still happening and the tragedy of that. That is where we are at. We are in very early days, the feelers have been put out, there has been a positive response and the work is ongoing in that realm.

It is important to add that what is now happening at the same time, this is part of the vision of what I am seeing from the new Government, is the holding of mass regional meetings with local communities, particularly in the areas that are most affected by conflict. That is to feed into any peace talks with armed groups in order that they are also directly involved in those talks and in what comes out of them. It is also more broadly part of the production and writing of what is called in Colombia the national development plan, which is the overall framework for the four years of the government and of what they will do. They are having mass consultations across the country to feed into that. That is something that Senator María José Pizarro Rodríguez spoke about when she was over recently. That is part of what is happening in terms of the total peace plan. What is happening more broadly touches on the point the Chair raised about the reaching out to these no-go zones and areas and hidden corners in order that there is social dialogue in every corner. This is starting to materialise in practice. These meetings are starting to be set up with different state authorities there and with local groups. Of course, as I keep saying, we are in an initial moment and let us see what happens.

The Senator mentioned possible collaborations and support. Certainly, what we would like to work on after this is to look at proposing and trying to get adhesion to a big statement in support of some of the positive elements that we are seeing around peace and the total peace plan. If that is something that might be agreeable to members here that would be fantastic. Hopefully, we can try to promote actions that show international support for any positive steps that come. Hopefully, Mr. Finn and I will be in touch about that.

On the subject of rural reform, one issue is the declaration from the government that that is its absolute priority in terms of its focus on the implementation of the 2016 agreement and recognising that this is the front and centre issue that has to be advanced. The agreement to purchase 3 million ha of land from the cattle ranchers' federation is a positive step. It has already started making moves to set up the agrarian jurisdiction or to reinvigorate that. It has announced that it will continue with some of the things that had already been developing in terms of what are called the Programas de Desarrollo con Enfoque Territorial, PDETs, that is, the specialised rural development plans for the most problematic regions. There are therefore new words and now we are starting to see some actions to focus on that rural reform issue.

The search for the disappeared unit is a part of the transitional justice mechanisms that may be less spoken about than the other two but as members will have hopefully seen in our briefing, it has made some really important material advances to connect families with stories and the bodies of their loved ones and even with connecting people with loved ones who were still alive. Their work has uncovered some mass graves. The task is mammoth in Colombia. As we said, there are 120,000, according to the truth commission, or maybe up to 210,000 people who have been disappeared. At the current rate, it would be approximately another 78 years for them to be able to have had some sort of a lead on all of the different cases. That is a huge task but it does not undermine what has already been achieved there.

In terms of displacement, obviously in terms of the historic displacement in Colombia, for a long time it was the highest and second-highest country for internal displacement in the world. It still continues, sadly. I do not have the figures to hand but I can send them over after this meeting. There are, however, still thousands of people and many families who are forced to flee from their homes every single year in Colombia as a result of this lack of security and lack of civilian state presence in the rural areas. That is tragic and that is why the focus on getting security and civilian state presence and negotiating with these armed groups is so fundamental.

A couple of members mentioned the influx of refugees from Venezuela. Many people came over recent years into Colombia. It is now seeming to be positive, certainly on a practical level, to have diplomatic relations reopened in order that there can be conversations between the two countries and governments, when that had previously completely broken down. This is first on the question of the refugees but also on the question of insecurity because some of the armed groups are operating in those border areas and it is obviously very hard to respond to that if the governments have no relations. That was a big motivation for them both to reinitiate that diplomatic relationship. Hopefully, we can see some positive results from that in terms both of the migrants and refugees from Venezuela and of the security situation in that region.

On the issue of Covid-19 and unemployment, I am afraid that I do not have the latest figures on Covid-19. Yet, when I was following it back in the day when Covid-19 was front and centre in my mind on a day-to-day basis, it felt very similar to here in terms of numbers and impact. Hopefully, we will know all of that unless I am completely off, but it was at some point when I was looking at it. I think that is generally how it was. I think what was interesting about Covid-19 and unemployment, and those two were mentioned together probably not by chance, is that is much of the discontent, certainly of what was reported from Colombia in terms of the analyses there, concerned the shock to the system and people’s immediate lives because so many people work in the informal sector in Colombia who then could not go and work. As there was not the apparatus or the subsidies for them to have something to replace that work, poverty levels became highly problematic for people. Many people said that this is what led to the huge protests in 2021. It was that combination of Covid-19 worsening the situation and rising poverty levels. In the brief that went round, I noted the latest poverty levels that were quoted from the Colombian institution that measures them. There are sadly still very high figures. Those two issues combined to contribute to where we are at today in Colombia.

On the issue of how to respond, mention was made of elements of the peace agreement that have not been advanced as much as we might have hoped and how to respond to those. Obviously, there is the statement of intent. Two key things that have happened so far, although we could probably mention others, are the relaunching of two of the bodies that were key to the implementation of the peace agreement. The first of these is the oversight body, which is called the CSIVI in Colombia. I will not translate that because it will be meaningless in a direct translation but it is the implementation oversight body on which there are representatives from the FARC and from the government. That has now been relaunched and that is a great signal of intent. Materially, it will hopefully help with the implementation, as well as with the National Commission on Security Guarantees, which was set up as part of the peace agreement specifically to look at the insecurity in rural areas and in other parts of the country. It had been instructed to try to generate a policy to respond to the presence of illegal armed groups. It is supposed to develop a policy towards the dismantling of illegal armed groups, including paramilitary successor groups or neo-paramilitary groups.

A big demand of human rights organisations mentioned repeatedly in the UN mission report was that this had not advanced sufficiently and that it was not meeting enough. This was the place we were supposed to see a policy developed to confront these illegal armed groups that are causing such chaos in Colombia, but it has not happened. If there was a seriousness to tackle this insecurity issue, why has this not developed? It is positive that this body has also been relaunched.

There is a mention of touching base after the trip, which would be fantastic and we would love to hear what the committee members see and their conclusions from that trip. That brings me back to the Chair's comment. I tried to answer at the beginning whether that optimism is shared and, of course, many people will still need to be convinced. The election result was almost 50-50 between Gustavo Petro and Rodolfo Hernández. Many others did not vote. There is a lot of convincing to do. We want to see material change. We want to see people no longer being killed. Hopefully, we can see something along those lines that might bring more people on board. However, there is a certain level of optimism.

Regarding victims' groups gaining confidence in the institutions, the groups we work with support the peace process. They have known decades of impunity in the normal court systems towards the crimes that have been committed against them. For them, the transitional justice system offers an alternative. Despite all its imperfections, the transitional justice system is offering far more to victims than was being offered before now. There is definitely considerable trust and confidence. There will always be shortcomings, but there is certainly recognition that this is a positive step to getting victims' rights respected in Colombia. I think that responds to all the questions asked. I reiterate my thanks for the invitation to appear before the committee.