%20(2).png){kind=logo}
Edwin Acosta
The killing of social leaders in Colombia has perpetuated the violent roots and power vacuum at the heart of the armed conflict of Colombia. From November 24 2016 to July 15 2020, there were a reported 971 indigenous, peasants, Afro, trade unionists, environmentalists, and women leaders killed by armed groups (Indepaz, 2020). One of the causes lies in the fact that uniformed armed combatants operating in rural areas find the accomplishment of one of their principal interests: activities of illegal mining and appropriation of land for their gain or to finance activities. That is the case in the south of Bolivar where there is a presence of armed groups which have established a power status. Consequently, the role of social leaders is to be agents that fight to safeguard the autonomy of peoples, diversity, land rights, and access to resources that begin to emerge, and be a link with national or regional entities. Inasmuch as their role starts to be visible, the armed groups attack leaders in order to keep their power hierarchy and send a warning to other such leaders. To explore this dynamic, this article will explore the situation of violence in Bolivar by looking at the case of Edwin Acosta, a rural leader in that department.
Firstly, it is important to know why the township of Tiquisio (Bolivar) and its social leaders are targeted by some armed actors. Tiquisio is located in the south of Bolivar and is characterized by the fertility of the soil, richness of resources such as gold and wood, and its strategic location in the country. Those factors have been the root of conflict in the area and have triggered illegal mining and the presence of armed groups. The Ombudsman’s Office reports that violence has escalated since 2009 when an alliance emerged between the criminal gang Los Urabeños (now known as the Clan del Golfo or Autodefensas Gaitanistas de Colombia/AGC), the Águilas Negras, and the 37th Front of the FARC. The purpose of the alliance was to commercialize drugs and to put the ELN out of business, sowing a dispute of territory. In 2012, AGC paramilitaries arrived at the headquarters of the communitary mill or ´trapiche´ in the village of Antojo in the Municipality of Tiquisio. They have been there ever since despite that community asking the government to carry out investigations and increase security. At the same time, the territory has a strategic corridor to connect with other townships of Bolivar, Sucre, Antioquia, and even Venezuela through bridle paths, and even maritime ports to transport drugs. Whereby, it has created three dimensions of conflict: territorial dispute, warfare dynamics, and resistance from the community. The last dimension has created a set of leaders working in defense of their territory, as was Edwin Acosta.
Edwin Emiro Acosta Ochoa was a social leader and miner native of Magangué, Bolívar. He was a husband and the father of three children. He was involved in groups of local peacebuilding and rural economic and legal activities such as the Comisión de Interlocución del Sur de Bolívar, Centro y Sur del Cesar (CISBCSC), Asociación Agrominera de Tiquisio, and Sociedad de Economía Mixta Ambiental Agropecuaria Minera (SEMAAM SAS). The principles of such organizations are focused on the governmental and social dialogue, defense of community interests, and human rights linked with local economic activities. In that sense, the social role of Edwin made him a Human Rights Defender, understood here, as “individuals, groups, and associations … contributing to … the effective elimination of all violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms of peoples and individuals” (Declaration on human right defenders, 1998). The events of his death occurred on the afternoon of May 26 2020, when three men (still unidentified) arrived at the leader’s residence and fired 4 shots, causing his death. In the days before his death, several deaths of social leaders had been registered; in Montelíbano (Córdoba) the murder of social leader Manuel Marriaga was reported on May 23. In Barranquilla (Atlantico) the death of social leader Henry Blanco was reported on May 14. On May 22, Edwin Acosta had denounced the disappearance of the community leader of San Pablo (Bolivar), María Rocío Silva, since the government has not guaranteed the welfare of social leaders, providing only militarization.
The response from authorities to the murder of Edwin Acosta Ochoa and most of the social leaders in the country have been based on the militarization of the affected areas, without acknowledging that despite the militarization in the region, these types of events continue to occur, showing that the high militarization merely increases violence in those areas. The state’s response must revolve around looking for the central cause of the problem in order to provide a solution. Keeping in mind that there are other factors. The past government processed guarantees for social leaders since the peace agreement, but these had little funding; while with the arrival of the new government (the government of Ivan Duque, since August 2018) more guarantees ended up buried; the lack of coordination between the state and the institutions creates gaps. Most of the time, the Ombudsman’s Office sends repeated warnings to the Ministery of the Interior about the threats to social leaders, yet the lack of response from the state means that leaders do not feel their support; these desperate calls that are frequently not heeded allow murders to be committed against social leaders like Edwin Acosta.
In conclusion, the murder of social leaders such as Edwin are happening throughout the country in different regions. Although the persecution of social leaders in Colombia has been repeatedly denounced by social organizations and human rights platforms, the state has not duly protected them or their rights, taking into account the Pact for Life announced by President Ivan Duque at the beginning of his term, which until now has not been fulfilled. In addition, the state should focus more on finding alternatives to militarization which could strengthen the state’s presence in terms of institutions and opportunities, in order to not allow that illegal groups exercise control in these areas.
*Article researched and written by Dafne Bohorquez, Talissa Curi & Leonela Nuñez
Information for this article sourced from:
Comments