Un país de muchas naciones

¿Qué es un país? Hemos hablado de derechos, individuos, instituciones, asambleas, etcétera, etcétera, etcétera. Eso no es el todo de un país, ni es lo que mucha gente entiende por su país.

La promesa de la diversidad, que es más la promesa de su reconocimiento por tanto la diversidad es una realidad ineludible, está consignada como parte de los fundamentos constitucionales. Pero ¿se cumple? ¿Qué país queda por fuera del centro, de la élite blanca que sigue gobernando? ¿Qué pasó con lo campesino? ¿Son suficientes los reconocimientos, los artículos, las herramientas?

En este capítulo de #LaPromesaCongelada nos hacemos preguntas sobre el tema.

Episode Transcript

(00:01):
From the presentation of the village.We are programming the new Constitution and the
promise to the extent that democracy mustbe based on the basis that it is
about taking them all into account,to hear them all, to speak to

(00:25):
them all, to try to convincethem all. That, in my opinion,
is the most important definition of democracy, which cannot simply be that of
the imposition of majorities. There werealso democratic things that Colombia had never learned
and that we learned with ocuation fromthe Constitution and the Constituent Assembly of nine

(00:49):
hundred and ninety- one, respectfor minorities, the consideration that minorities also
have to be heard. Minorities mustalso be able to say what they mean.
And it must be borne in mindthat a constitution cannot impose itself on
a minority in any way. Aconstitution has to have minorities, it has

(01:10):
to respect minorities and it has tobe the least. Giving them the recognition
that corresponds to their rights, totheir voice, to their aspirations, so
that if something was democratic, itwas all that happened there and what came
out of there where we progressed lessand happened more franga decentralization. We are

(01:30):
still too centeral, too high-constitutional power- centered country took financial advantage
of the central government of the stockexchange. Today is a time to think
in regional terms. The one whodoes not leave that is the national government

(01:52):
which has become very centralist again,especially the finance ministers, to say with
affection, because there have been goodfinance ministers, but they do not want
to let go of power. TheMinistry of Finance and National Planning does not
want to let go of power.And those of us who come from the
province say look at it is thatthe whole country, with fifty million inhabitants,

(02:15):
does not fit neither in Jimenez norin twenty- six. What do
we do then let go of power. That addiction of the center to power
has done Colombia a lot of damage. We have made progress in terms of
the fact that today the codes aremade by the Congress of the Republic and

(02:37):
are good regular or bad, butthey are done by the Congress of the
Republic, which does so in representationof what the Declaration of the Rights of
Man and the Citizen of the Frenchis called the general will. It had
become fashionable among us that to makea code that had to be done by
a commission of experts, and thatcommission of experts had to be given by
the Government, which had to obtainpowers from Congress and then he had legislative

(03:00):
power was exercised by the national Governmentand not by Congress. When that has
to be done by Congress. Withall the flaws that Congress can have.
But it is the Congress that wechoose and the Congress that it does brings
our voice to the consideration of thediscussions that take place there and of the

(03:23):
laws that are converted or made bythe Congress of the Republic. That has
been another very important debate. TheConstitution of eighty- six and the constitutions
of the past were that there wasreally nothing to recognize most of the indigenous
and Afro communities, substantially the indigenousand the Afro in this conception of the

(03:45):
State had more the look of aminor. Then there was not all the
potential to contribute to the country,to have its strong organizations, there was
not all the recognition of its ancestralvalues, there was not the recognition of
all that are the enormous contributions thatalso give in terms of care, biodiversity

(04:09):
and other issues. It seems tome that these communities had inherited for several
centuries a tradition of having been quitemarginal in Colombian society, not having been
identified as nations really within the Colombiannation and the Constitution. What it does
is to recognize that they are truebefore peoples, that they are nations that

(04:31):
have a diverse culture, that theyhave a lot to contribute and that that
wealth is part of the enormous complexityand wealth is the Colombian peblo of what
is done is exaltation. We area rich hair, it is a biodiverse
people, but a people also ethnicallydiverse culturally, and that shows a much
stronger society, with much more capacityfor dialogue. They put us on the

(04:55):
path of listening to us, ofidentifying ourselves, of recognizing ourselves in diversities
and, therefore, places us onthe path of being able to know that
in the ancestral territories there have beencommunities with enormous potential that that was not
recognized at the time. Thus,for example, Law 70, which is
derived from the auers of the Constitutionof 1990 and which recognizes the rights of

(05:17):
the Afros, which creates the CommunityCouncils, undoubtedly gives a very heartfelt response
to the urgency of recognizing collective territories. In fact, the communities already lived
there, already working collectively. Theydid not have a vision of private individual

(05:39):
ownership, but rather something much moreof a collective character. And the Constitution
takes that step to this recognition andgives them a very large strengthening mechanism,
which are the community councils. Therewe have a Constitution in dialogue with the
ethnic and the diversity of our people, which seems to me to give us
also a framework of peace means buildinga step. I believe that, from

(06:02):
the perspective of the peoples, therecognition of those rights was very important.
At the time, it still is. Recognition of ethnic and cultural diversity is
very important, not only for peoples, but for the country. The fundamental
right to prior consultation has allowed usnot only to preserve the biodiversity of this

(06:23):
country, but also for the country, for humanity. Regarding the challenges we
face today in the global climate crisis, we have been our efforts, from
the black, indigenous and peasant peoples, to stop from there to say we

(06:45):
have to take care of the moor, we have to take care of the
river, we have to take careof the mountain. It wasn' t
a bet, because I' mblack because I' m indigenous. It
has not been a bet on thelife and life of all, of all
that is a country. We havetalked about individual rights, institutions, assemblies,
etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. Thatis not the whole of a country,

(07:08):
nor is it what many people understandabout their country. A country,
to begin with, is a drawing, an outline that only the maps of
textbooks are seen and that demarcates theinside and outside of a nation. A
nation is a group of people whowere born within the line that demarcates a
country. But Colombia is not anation, not a single one. At
least when someone asks us what Colombiais like, we find ourselves crawling around

(07:30):
to explain it. Colombia is nota white nation, nor indigenous, nor
Afro, nor does it have asingle frocolombianity among those of the Pacific,
Caribbean, Raisal and Palenqueros. It' s not a single color, but
definitely not a single geography. Itis not a purely Caribbean nation, nor
peaceful, nor will Amazón and thepotter. We manage that, even the

(07:50):
immense diversity that strengthens us, butit makes it so difficult for us to
define ourselves and find ourselves. Letus return to the fact that a country,
in this case Colombia, is adrawing on a map. Then we
have to ask ourselves again what thischapter of the frozen promise is like or
what makes it look like to understandhow the Constitution of the nineties and one

(08:11):
understood two fundamental points of the constructionof the country as an idea. Let
' s start with the territory.That imaginary line is crossed and subdivided by
others, who seek to define theadministration of that space so that it is
viable. However, the 1990s Constitutiondid not create a country out of nothing.
On the contrary, it picked upa country with historical vices and endemic
defects that marked it and even continueto mark it now. The promises of

(08:35):
the Constitution are also territorial. Startingwith decentralization, because centralism is the root
of many historical problems, it hasbeen possible to overcome what role it plays
in territorial divisions. After ninety-one there is evidence and local strengthening.
What is the map left to usby the Constitution of the ninety- one
and how it is destined to betransformed. In this case there is the

(08:58):
common place. There are more questions. There were many differences between the departmentalist,
regionalist, districtist and municipal border models. We could agree on some fundamental
elements. I' m going togive two examples. We all agree that
the constitutional autonomy of provinces, regions, departments and municipalities should be strengthened.

(09:26):
The issue was not to set upan entanglement there of many levels of government
and finally we opted for three basiclevels of government, the Nation, departments
and districts and municipalities, which isthe local level. Let' s call
it that and open the possibility tothe future, with the dynamics of the

(09:48):
mobile map, as Orlando called itfalse to reach a regime in a country
at peace of regions and eventually provinces, in the case of indigenous communities,

(10:13):
I think there is one thing veryinteresting and is that, at the time,
the Constitution of the 1990s and onewas recognized in Latin America as one
of the constitutions that provided the mostguarantees and rights to the population, to
the minority populations, particularly to theindigenous. I remember perfectly that debate and
everyone was saying, that is,Latin America has to look at what Colombia
is doing with the Constituent Assembly andindigenous rights, because that is the place

(10:37):
where the answer is now what hashappened with that again, the space of
articulation between political rights and economic andsocial rights. If one is clear about
what has happened in the strike withthe indigenous communities, for example, in
Cali, it is that, althoughthey have spaces for participation enshrined in the

(10:58):
local legislative body and in national legislativebodies, that has not transformed, let
' s say, the vision thatColombian society has about the indigenous communities.
Let' s say if one listensto the right- wing political discourse on
indigenous communities, for example, itremains the same supremely reactionary and non-

(11:22):
recognizing discourse of life' s rights. Not then that they return to their
shelter. It is as if wehad solved this by defining ourselves to a
particular space, which is the protectionand care of national parks, and with
that we thought it was enough andthere is no need to do anything more.
So that' s the place whereI always feel that formal and legal

(11:45):
doesn' t necessarily translate into changesin political culture. If you don'
t have that connected with political leadershipsthat promote those changes, then if you
ask indigenous communities if they' rehearing better than they were before the 1990s
Constitution, you probably do. Theyhave many more spaces for participation, but

(12:07):
they are far from being recognized asa group of the same nature, with
the same rights, with the sameduties, as any other social group in
Colombia. Yeah, first of all, let' s say recognition, which
is not minor. Undoubtedly, theissue of the autonomy of their territories,
for example, respect for their jurisdictions, respect for their natural resources through mechanisms

(12:33):
such as prior consultation. For example, prior consultation with communities has been essential
to guarantee their rights, so thatall the issues of mining, the issue
of deforestation, the subject of thesemegaprojects, as they really have a legal
tool to be able to guarantee theirexistence and, ultimately, their way of

(12:54):
life. So it seems to methat prior consultation with communities has been the
fundamental tool. Beyond recognition, letus say as different communities what favors indigenous
people in the Constitution of the ninety- one, all the discussion about sétnic
minorities and the rights of ethnic minorities, particularly in Latin America, where they

(13:15):
had been subjected to all the abusesof conquest and so on. And where
we say the Creole political elites nevergave them spaces and violently. Let us
say their ownership of land and theirpolitical rights with the peasants is different,
because they do not have this statusas an ethnic minority. So they'

(13:37):
re more of a social sector thatputs you in the debate. Well,
and if the peasants recognize them xand already in law, then when we
recognize them to the entrepreneurs and howmuch we recognize it to I don'
t know who to economic and socialsectors. I think that there the discussion
has to go much more on theside of economic and social rights and less
on the side of group recognition asa minority group, that one? I

(14:00):
think it' s basically the point, but anyway, part of what the
legal order solves is the distribution ofpower among societies. An entrepreneur and a
business union will always have much moreaccess to power and much more resources to
affect the legislature and affect the executiveand produce decisions that benefit it from the

(14:22):
power it will have. For example, the peasantry, especially when it is
not socially organized, although after theConstitution of the 1990s and one has been
organized in much more effective ways,but its ability to influence the decision-
making process is much less than thatof the entrepreneur. In theory, the
legal system should correct this imbalance,which creates the difference in the economic and

(14:43):
social situation in which both are present. But we are still far from achieving
that. We have made very significantprogress in the field of rights against the
political model. Also in Colombia,bipartisanism was reinforced with the National Front,
which was the Peace Agreement, toend the conservative liberal violence during the National

(15:05):
Front, in the Pact of theyear fifty- seven fifty- eight and
which allowed them to govern within thecriterion of alternation until the year seventy-
four. But really my partisanship wasmaintained until the Constitution of ninety- one.
The other parties were virtually illegal orcould not be organized. The Constitution

(15:28):
of the 1990s democratized the political lifeof the country and we went to the
other extreme. In the 1990s webecame more than seventy- seven, seventy
- eight political parties and movements.Anyone already arrived and mounted a legal personality
and gave him recognition as a politicalparty. That was the other end.

(15:52):
Fortunately, there were initiatives that allowedfor control. Today we have fourteen,
fifteen, sixteen political parties that reflectdifferent expressions, different conceptions about what Colombian
society should be. But in thatsense too there was a very important advance

(16:14):
that was to say to end thebipartisan regime and allow the pluralist flourishing of
political positions, ideological conceptions about whatthe state and society are. Now let
' s talk about the nation,the nations actually, for the first time,

(16:37):
in one hundred and eighty- oneyears of republican history, a recognized
constitution that Colombia is a diverse plurinationalcountry. The Constitution gave full citizenship to
Afro- Colombians, Raisales and Palenquerosand the indigenous peoples as a whole.
Now, thirty years later, it' s easy to say brave. This
should have been the case from thebeginning, but it was not, and

(17:02):
it was precisely the constituent in whichit opened the door underrepresented as were the
indigenous and Afro- Colombian peoples.It was not the only sub- representation
of seventy- four constituents. Onlyfour were women, and yet this is
the Constitution which for the first timerecognized equal rights for each other and also
recognized sexual diversity and freedom of worshipunder a secular State the promise of diversity,

(17:26):
which is more, the promise ofits recognition. Diversity is therefore an
inescapable reality. It is included aspart of the constitutional basis. But what
country remains outside the center of thewhite elite that continues to rule is fulfilled.
What happened to the peasantry are enoughrecognitions, articles, tools and one
takes a photograph of the Constituent Assemblyof nine hundred and ninety- one.

(17:52):
B let' s say, someonecould highlight diversity as negative. I think
it' s the most positive thingthat someone said is that there are very
few constituents, very little constitutionalists.And yes, perhaps there were not many
constitutionalists, but someone once taught mequite rightly is that constitutions must be made

(18:14):
by constituents and not by constitutionalists.The constitutionalists come later when the Constitution arrives.
And that was how positive he was. There were teachers, there were
trade unionists, there was a formerpresident of the Republic, there were former
ministers, there were politicians, therewere lawyers, there were doctors, there

(18:37):
were engineers, there were peasants,there were indigenous people, whom we had
never heard in five hundred years ofhistory for any effect. That seems to
me to have had an absolutely positiveeffect on territorial autonomy, which has been
so positive in terms of corruption,corruption in the territories and, in particular,
the election of mayors and governors whoare committed, the mayors with whom

(18:57):
they were the funders of their campaigns. And from there arise all the corruption
episodes related to hiring, with whatis now commonly called jam. That seems
to me to be a serious flawthat has led to autonomy. In that

(19:18):
sense, let' s say,it was less bad, even though they
were very bad in other ways.The decision of the President of the Republic
to appoint the governor by him thegovernors and the governors the mayors, who
had good reason not to do so, i e did not compromise them with
petty private interests, with the greedof those who somehow engage in collaboration or

(19:44):
financing their campaigns. One example isthe issue of egalitarian marriage, since it
was ultimately a decision of the ConstitutionalCourt that had to be taken over by
the Congress of the Republic, whichdid not do so. So, then,
that whole subject of same- sexparent marriage was a great conquest of
the Constitutional Court. The issue ofthe recognition of minorities, the issue of

(20:08):
accepting differences, the rights of personsdeprived of their liberty, is to change
that culture. Let' s sayintolerant that there are only certain people in
Colombia with better rights than others.The lack of pluralism. That is what
has been discussed. Let' ssay to reverse, to change that culture

(20:33):
of patriarchal society, let' ssay almost that of the 19th century,
for a recognition of diversity and tolerance. It seems to me that there is
also a lack on the part ofthe judges, such as to understand more
that they have to be owed tothe citizens, that they are due to
the laws, that they are dueto the rights and that, therefore,

(20:57):
they have to be more strongly supportiveof seeing how they protect them, how
they earn respect for the majesty ofthe task they perform for all Colombians,
how they help those who do nothave the necessary conditions to assert their rights
for themselves. In cases where thathappens, delays in justice. It can

(21:18):
' t be, can' tit still be? How is it that
in Colombia, usually judicial proceedings,except guardianship and in some cases popular proceedings,
take more than ten years than inthe matter of, for example,
administrative litigation? The trials last fifteen, sixteen, eighteen years. That can

(21:41):
' t be. It can't be because a justice that comes fifteen
years late is a justice that doesn' t work. Then there is a
long way to go in the capitalof the Republic and in the rest of
the national territory. Without a doubt, it was the passage of a centralist
authoritarian constitution that eradicated that its backbonewas based on the state of emergency of

(22:07):
the siege State to move to aclearly guaranteed Constitution, clearly defending fundamental guarantees
and public freedoms, in addition tomechanisms to defend it, so that it
was that state that was bet bythe delegates of one thousand nine hundred and

(22:27):
ninety- one. And that iswhat he is trying to reach Colombian society
during these thirty years of transition,hard because of the political, social and
economic events, the agrarian reform lawthat was done in the government of Alberto
Lleras Camargo, beginning the National Front, which also had some advances, even

(22:47):
parallel to peace policies, but thatwas also insufficient. The agrarian reform of
the government of Carlos y Era restratobecause it was even the one that came
forward that organized to the peasants theNational Association that peasant users, but then
comes the Pact of Chicoral, thatdivides that movement and that somehow made backward

(23:07):
the entire agrarian movement. There's a big agrarian debt. Colombian society
cries out to the Colombian agrarian worldfor many rights claims. Or there has

(23:34):
been a constitutional debate that has notended, because we have failed to reach
the goal that we should reach interms of decentralization. In terms of regional
autonomy, we have a long wayto go. We have made significant progress,
but there is a long way togo. In that matter. There

(23:55):
is an additional topic that is byno means separated from the questions that populate
this episode. The diversity of thecountry was recognized by the Constitution, which
ultimately achieved this recognition of the careof the environment. In our next chapter
we are going to explore this ideathoroughly with new guests, but we wanted
to know how these two ideas aremixed and whether it was a beneficial association

(24:15):
of the voice of our and ourprotagonists in these specials on the Constitution of
nine hundred and ninety- one,which has often been called an environmental constitution,
which is a constitution. A constitutionis the architectural map, but those
who must build the building, becauseCongress, the Presidency, the Ministries,

(24:37):
the Courts and one can have abeautiful map such as the map of rights,
honestly the most advanced in Latin America. The Constitutional Court, for example,
consultation not only in Latin America,but in the world a. The
Colombian Constitutional Court was the first environmentalcourt in the world, our Court.

(25:00):
But one thing is speech and anotherto make reality. Then, as I
say to my young university students,rights must be fought, of course,
peacefully. But rights must be fought. Or the frozen promise is a capital

(25:30):
production. Sound for capital, publiccommunication system. Today with the voices of
Ever Bustamante and García, Alejandro Ramelle, Gustavo Zafra, Roldan, Sandra Borda
Guzmán, Ganna Márquez, Mena,No, Sr Héctor Fabio Ena, Juan

(25:52):
Carlos Es Guerra Portocarrero, research,interviews by Viviana Beja and Pablo Compers.
The interviews were coordinated by Jorge Martínezand Fernanda Roja and conducted by Christiano Hernández,
María Alejandra Cuestas in the production,Ician González in the edition, narration
by María Alejandra Cuestas and Santiago Rivas. Our image is the work of Laura
codostein Networks production assistance and realization thanksto the digital team led by Jaime Barbosa

(26:18):
and made up of Camila Velandía,Felipe Laverde, Nicolás Peña, Nicolás Rodríguez,
Sebastián Figueroa, Stephan Jaramillo, LauraPava, Mavi y Torres and Manuel
Borna, Dirección General de Santiago Rivas. This special was made for television in
alliance with the viewer, whom wereleased some audios for some episodes, so
thank you if you liked this episode. Please share capital public communication system