Enforced disappearances have been a common phenomenon throughout the history of Latin America, they are often used as a tool of oppression and mark some of the darkest moments in the continent’s history. In the case of Colombia, forced disappearances accompanied heavy armed conflict since the 1940s, and are often part of a much larger story of violence and reconciliation that continues to this day. On July 28^th, 2024, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (I.A.C.H.R.) filed Case 12.434 against Colombia with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I.A. Court). The case concerns the responsibility of the Colombian State for the death of seven people and the forced disappearance of 25 people by paramilitaries in 1998, in Barrancabermeja.

The Colombian armed conflict, which can also be classified as a civil war, officially began in 1964, with the creation of two guerrilla groups, the Revolutionary Armed Force of Colombia (F.A.R.C.), and the National Liberation Army (E.L.N.). Although at first their goal was ideological, these groups began to get involved in kidnapping, extortion, and participating in the drug trade to sponsor their cause. During this time, the United States became concerned with Colombian counterinsurgency and recommended that “civil defense” groups be formed, arming civilians to combat the expansion of guerrillas. Law 48 of 1968 was then passed, which allowed the Defense Ministry to supply civilians with military-grade weaponry. In the 1980s, when the drug trade increased, drug cartels began to get involved with the paramilitaries and created private armies to help fight guerrillas. In 1994, Colombia’s Ministry of Defense authorized the creation of legal paramilitary groups known as Special Vigilance and Private Security Services (C.O.N.V.I.V.I.R.); these groups then unified into the A.U.C. (Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia). It was the north bloc of the A.U.C., Autodefensas Unidas de Santander y Sur del Cesar (A.U.S.A.C.), that first brought para-militarism into Barrancabermeja in 1998. It is this instance that is the subject of the I.A.C.H.R. case.

As mentioned previously, case 12.434 concerns the responsibility of the Colombian State for the death of seven people and the forced disappearance of 25 people. Enforced disappearance is a human rights violation that is universally and categorically forbidden. It is a crime under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and is forbidden by international law during times of peace or armed conflict. An enforced disappearance is defined as follows by the 1994 Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons:

“Forced disappearance is considered to be the act of depriving a person or persons of his or their freedom, in whatever way, perpetrated by agents of the state or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state, followed by an absence of information or a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the whereabouts of that person, thereby impeding his or her recourse to the applicable legal remedies and procedural guarantees.”

It is through this definition that we will explore enforced disappearances in the Colombian context. Considering the historical background to paramilitary groups and the assistance of the state in the formation and arming of these, the crimes committed by the A.U.C. were often with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state, and therefore can be investigated using the framework of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons.

The Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons is part of the Inter-American Human Rights Treaties, and was ratified by Colombia on April 12^th, 2005. The State of Colombia also ratified the American Convention on Human Rights on July 31^st, 1973, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court on June 21^st, 1985. As such, the Colombian State is under the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (I.A. Court). The I.A. Court concluded that the State is responsible for violating the rights to, life, personal integrity, personal liberty, judicial guarantees, protection of children, and judicial protection, established in articles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8.1, 19, and 25.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Likewise, the State is responsible for violating articles I. a), I. b), and III of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. Consequently, the I.A. Court has recommended that the State provide full reparations to the victims, offer medical and psychological treatment to the victims’ families, undertake a coordinated search for the disappeared individuals, conduct impartial and effective investigations to identify and sanction those responsible, and strengthen investigative capacities and witness protection mechanisms to prevent future similar incidents. Colombia has delayed compliance, despite being given multiple extensions, additionally, there is evidence of state obstruction and impunity in handling the case. Although the case may set a precedent for holding the Colombian government accountable for human rights violations committed in conjunction with paramilitary forces, it also underscores the state’s failure to provide justice and reparations, a key aspect of the peace and reconciliation process that ensued the conflict.

On November 24^th, 2016, after four years of negotiations, the Final Agreement to end the Armed Conflict and Build a Stable and Lasting Peace was signed between the Colombian Government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (F.A.R.C.). The agreement focused on five main points, a comprehensive rural reform, political participation, the bilateral and definitive ceasefire, including laying down of arms and the reincorporation of members of the F.A.R.C.-E.P. into civilian life, a Solution to the Illicit Drugs Problem, and lastly and most relevant to this analysis, a Victims Agreement. The Victims Agreement created the Comprehensive System for Truth, Justice, Reparations and Non-Recurrence (Sistema Integral de Verdad, Justicia, Reparación y No Repetición), which focused on restorative justice and included a Special Unit for the Search for Persons deemed as Missing in the context of and due to the armed conflict (U.B.P.D.). Following the ratification of the agreement, Colombia has made great strides in the search for disappeared persons, which has significantly contributed to the peace and reconciliation process.

In August 2017, the U.B.P.D. officially began operations. The unit’s mission is to lead, coordinate, and assist in the conduct of humanitarian efforts to find and identify all individuals who have gone missing due to the armed conflict. A National Search Plan (Plan Nacional de Búsqueda, P.N.B.) was launched in 2020, as the framework to find more than 200,000 people missing due to the armed conflict. The P.N.B.’s structure can be broken down into three main points: Information, Location, and Participation. This first point focuses on information collection, the second conducts the search, beginning by assuming the victim is alive, and the third involves families providing information and/or being reunited with the disappeared person. As of now, 40,038 search requests have been placed, 30,214 of these have produced results. The work of the U.B.P.D. has been essential in achieving closure and justice for the victims and family members of those who have suffered from forced disappearance. However, forced disappearances have left a difficult legacy and are still a reality in Colombia today.

The sequels of enforced disappearances are seen in the families of victims and the persistence of the crime after the 2016 peace treaty. As in much of Latin America, women have banded together to search for their missing loved ones, however, according to Amnesty International, in Colombia they face consistent stigmatization, threats, and violence due to their mission. Furthermore, a delegation of the U.N. Committee on Enforced Disappearances (C.E.D.) visited Colombia in December 2024, and highlighted the bureaucracy of the U.B.P.D. and the various barriers that victims face in the system, especially from the part of government agencies. These barriers show the work ahead to strengthen and provide a true and effective transitional justice system. Furthermore, this same C.E.D. delegation concluded that, “enforced disappearances [..] are not just a crime of the past. They continue to occur daily across the country in diverse circumstances.” The International Committee of the Red Cross registered 571 new cases of people who went missing between the signing of the Peace Agreement and the 31^st of December 2020. The persistence of forced disappearances and the failures of the transitional justice system must thus be addressed in order for Colombia to truly move forward into an era of peace.

The case of enforced disappearances in Colombia, particularly as highlighted in Case 12.434, underscores the persistent challenges in achieving truth, justice, and reconciliation in the country. While the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has held the Colombian state accountable and mandated reparative measures, delays, impunity, and bureaucratic barriers continue to hinder progress. The work of institutions like the U.B.P.D. has been instrumental in addressing past crimes, yet enforced disappearances remain a reality, reflecting deeper structural issues within the transitional justice system. For Colombia to fully move beyond its violent past, it must strengthen its commitment to accountability, support victims and their families, and ensure that enforced disappearances are no longer a tool of repression. Only through meaningful reforms and a sustained dedication to human rights can the country hope to build a lasting peace.