Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries

1

Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá, Colombia
Casey Mariel Anderson
Advisor: Dr. Ann Farnsworth
University of Pennyslvania

2

Index
Paper 3
Bibliography 25
Appendix 1: Transcripts 27

3

Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá, Colombia
Colombia is a country with a particularly violent and complex political history. It
currently stands on the precipice of a monumental peace agreement in the longest-
running civil armed conflict of the western hemisphere against the Fuerzas Armadas
Revolucionarias Colombianas (FARC). In this tumultuous environment, questions of
transitional justice and the post-conflict landscape are already being considered.
However, key to the success of a sustainable peace in Colombia is its productive civil
society. Over-enthusiasm for civil society’s potential benefits is a polemic issue. But
while the specifics are still being debated, it is generally agreed upon that a strong civil
society is crucial for the establishment of a sustainable, or lasting, peace in conflict
countries. (Cite)
The purpose of this study was to examine civil society consolidation in Bogotá,
Colombia through a case study approach aimed at understanding civil society
organizations (CSOs) role in conflict countries. Bogotá was chosen as it is the political
and cultural capital of Colombia and is also home to the highest concentration of CSOs.
This presents certain limitations, as generalizations regarding the state of civil society in
Colombia as a whole cannot be made. However, Bogotá’s historical significance lends
itself to be more representative of general trends than any other city. Seven CSOs were
interviewed during August 2013 regarding the specifics of their organization as well as
the sector as a whole. The information gleaned from interviews with active participants
of Colombian civil society were then compared to the academic literature available on
civil society in Colombia. This provided the basis for an analysis of civil society
consolidation in Bogotá, as well as projections for its role in a post-conflict reality.
Future research could bolster these findings by including a larger number of CSOs, a
wider variety of the types of CSOs interviewed, as well as expand this method to
incorporate other cities as well as rural areas.

4

Political History of Colombia
Colombia was a part of the Spanish Empire. The Spanish monarchy, early on in its
colonization efforts, partnered with the Church, conferring upon it special privileges and
protections in exchange for the evangelization of indigenous populations and
ecclesiastical approval of colonization, giving it legitimacy. Colombia’s independence
(1810) and subsequent liberal revolution (1851-76) promoted secularization and a shift
of government responsibilities such as education and healthcare, away from the church
and towards municipal governments. This created a political confrontation over
education that came to define the distinction amongst Colombia’s traditional political
parties, Liberals who wanted secularized education and Conservatives who allied
themselves with the church in support of continued catholic control over education.
However, the fragility of the new state and the historical import of the church led to
Conservative control of politics until the 1930s. Eventually, from 1930-1945, Liberals
dominated politics and sought to expand the role of the government in areas
traditionally dominated by the Church. Their reform efforts greatly increased tensions
amongst the two parties, escalating polarization. In 1948, popular Liberal Presidential
Candidate Jorge Eliécer Gaitán was murdered during a speech in Bogotá, leading to the
eruption of riots, which came to be known as Bogotázo. But that was only the beginning;
from 1948-1958 political violence amongst Liberals and Conservatives ravaged the
entire country. This conflict was called La violencia (“the violence”) and claimed the
lives of 300,000 Colombians. The violence that characterized politics up until now, and
a brief period of military dictatorship (1953-7), promulgated a 1958 pact between
Liberals and Conservatives, “El Frente Nacional” (“The National Front”). It
institutionalized the peaceful alternating transfer of power between the two parties, but
excluded all other groups from politics until 1982. Widespread exclusion led to the
consolidation of previously fragmented excluded groups, most notably those who
created the FARC, rural peasants.
State strength is based upon a higher or lower capacity to control the rules and
effectively monopolize violence. High-capacity regimes can successfully respond to
grievances and preferences, while limiting claim making to only legal channels. A low-
capacity regime cannot satisfy requests from groups and fails to prevent competing
groups from resorting to violent claim-making tactics. Due to this, groups other than the

5

government are able to gain popular support (conferring legitimacy upon them) and use
coercive means. Therefore, essentially by excluding all other groups through El Frente
Nacional, the government institutionalized inflexibility in its ability to respond to
grievances from any group other than Liberals and Conservatives. This means that the
state has been low capacity ever since 1958, and paved the way for other groups to
emerge. The government based in Bogotá was not strong enough to seek combat with
the guerrillas and their relative isolation led to their dismissal as a threat to stability.
Due to this state weakness, the FARC was able to promote its own legitimacy since it had
actually penetrated the neglected rural areas and responded to the grievances of
impoverished peasants more effectively. While the FARC at first did not allow the
production of illegal crops, they simply taxed those who farmed in “their” territories;
they started to produce coca during the seventies to fund itself. At the 1982 and 1984
guerrilla conventions, FARC leadership announced a policy of amassing funds by taxing
coca production, serving as a gateway to the eventual expansion of their notorious
involvement in the drug industry. However, the FARC wasn’t the only group illegal
armed group established in opposition to the Frente Nacional, there was also the ELN,
M-19, EPL, PRT, CRS, and Quintin Lame, a militant indigenous group. The
establishment of Colombia as the global center of production for cocaine and rise of the
notorious cartels led to steady security deterioration from the 1970’s to 1990’s. With the
end of the Frente Nacional and the election of President Betancur (1982-6), the process
of reform and political opening began.
From 1982-2002 there were three failed attempts at peace negotiations with the
FARC. These failures highlighted the incompatibility between the FARC’s proposed
reforms and the interests behind those sectors of the economy. In order peace to be
achieved it became clear that a third sector was needed to mediate between the FARC
and the entrenched interests lobbying the government as well as to create pressure for a
negotiated settlement. President Belisario Betancur attempted talks in 1984 that failed
due to lack of support and the subsequent massacre on behalf of paramilitaries. The
following President Barco established a peace policy that outlined demilitarization,
transition and incorporation into civilian life. This laid the foundation for President
Gaviria’s 1990 demobilization of the M19 (March 9, 1990), PRT (Jan. 25, 1991), Quintin
Lame (May 27, 1991), CRS (April 9, 1994) and EPL (Feb. 15, 1991). Part of the impetus

6

for demobilization was inclusion in the 1991 National Constituent Assembly, which
would rewrite the Colombian constitution. Seventy delegates were appointed through
public elections held in December of 1990. The assembly convened for the first time in
February 1991 to create the new constitution, the result of increasing mobilizations
demanding the inclusion of other political parties into the political process.
The importance of the 1991 cannot be overstated, as it ended the institutionalized
exclusion of any party besides the Liberals and Conservatives. The initial grievances of
the armed groups were their exclusion from the formal political system, which they had
deemed illegitmate as a result. However, the concerted effort of the government to
create a new constitution that was more inclusive created new pathways for
participation. Many of the armed groups demobilized and opted to participate now that
it was an available option. This exemplifies a shift in legitimacy from unproductive
means to more productive ones. However, since the FARC didn’t demobilize, the
unproductive CSOs clearly continue to exist after 1991, but are much less common.
However, the 1990’s continued to see increasing activism for peace as the FARC gained
strength fostered instability in the country. The fervor for peace culminated in 1997
when ten million people voted for a peace mandate (“mandato”) in October elections.
This pressured President Pastrana sufficiently, and he started peace negotiations with
the FARC in 1998. However, his allowance of a demilitarized zone elicited domestic
criticisms of the talks, as well as allowed the guerrillas to have a safe haven from where
to regroup. The breakdown of these talks occurred when the FARC hijacked a plane with
Senators on board. Further, also commencing in 1998, President Clinton issued “Plan
Colombia” which gave US aid and training to the Colombian armed forces. After the
breakdown of the 1998-2002 effort led by Pastrana, the optimism that had gripped the
nation during the 90’s broke down. The public lost trust in the peace processes as it did
not reduce the intensity of the conflict, increase democratic participation, or really
provide any answers to the profound social and economic crises gripping the nation.
This newfound pessimism, and militaristic approach propagated by the United States,
led to the rise of President Uribe. His method was to only agree to demobilization and
reintegration following a military weakening of the insurgency. While he was ultimately
successful in cutting down the size of the FARC, he has been accused of human rights
abuses and ties to paramilitary organizations. At the end of his term, his defense

7

minister, Juan Manuel Santos, ran for the presidency with Uribe’s support. President
Santos initiated a new round of talks, with much international support, that were
launched in November 2012. The negotiations have six points that must be agreed upon
before the entire accord can go into effect. Most Colombians remain pessimistic
regarding the outcome of this current, fourth, attempt at peace.
Civil Society in Conflict-Stricken Countries
Civil society is defined as “the arena, outside the family, the state and the market which
is created by individual and collective actions, organizations and institutions to advance
shared interests.” In Tocqueville’s writings about the American colonies he found that
Americans’ propensity to associate was that aspect of modern society that could wipe
away inherited statuses found in aristocratic societies. Putnam has described at length
how civil society is a necessary condition for a modern liberal democracy. However, civil
society is based upon social capital, an instantiated informal norm that promotes
cooperation between two or more individuals. Social capital arises spontaneously from
iterated interactions amongst individuals. The iteration of these interactions allows for
individuals to develop an interest in the result of said interaction, thus they have an
incentive to cooperate. Social capital forms the basis of civil society, without the trust
created by social capital, voluntary associations would not occur.
The notion that an active civil society is unequivocally “good” for democracy is
contested. Chandhoke (2007) claims that civil society itself does not guarantee
democracy, but rather provides the actors with the values, the space and inspiration to
battle for it. Kopecky argues that it really depends upon which groups within civil
society dominate the landscape. Abstracting out further, Anderson asserts that the level
of functioning and characteristics of the state affect how civil society operates, such as
levels of cooperation or adversity with the state, and the principles it is guided by.
Marchetti and Tocci (2009) discuss how civil society is not only shaped by the context in
which it operates, but also actively shapes the context. It is influenced by the strength of
the state, nature of the state, socioeconomic underdevelopment, and the character and
role of the international community within the state. When it comes to violence, it has
been asserted that the capacity of civil society to address different forms of violence
depends upon its composition in its interpretations of contemporary warfare.

8

An armed conflict is defined as a “contested incompatibility that concerns
government and/or territory where the use of armed force between two parties, of which
at least one is the government of a state, is present.” By this definition, Colombia has
been involved in multiple conflicts for an extended period of time. The center for
systemic peace takes other variables into consideration in its calculation of state fragility,
such as direct and indirect deaths and injuries, sexual crimes and intimidation,
population dislocations, damages and distortions to social networks, damage and
destruction to the environment and infrastructure, diversion of resources and
psychological trauma to individuals and adverse changes. According to the center,
Colombia has moderate state fragility, but is undergoing serious warfare. Also, conflict
and peace are not linear, as Colombia’s history shows. There are flare-ups of violence
and stalemates in negotiations
Contemporarily, most conflicts are now characterized as “new wars” which are
fought by a combination of state and non-state actors. These wars are both global and
local at once and violence is highly localized. But while the number and deadliness of
conflicts has lessened in the twenty-first century, there has been a counter-trend of the
rise of organized crime. Furthermore, those actors interested in perpetuating “new wars”
do so because they see war as a source of revenue. Unfortunately, in the case of
Colombia, the insurgency is fuelled by the profits made by organized crime. Part of the
problem is also, according to Collier, that there is a low opportunity cost for conflict
because there are few other vehicles to gain a legitimate income. Fighting is the best
available form of employment available for many of the insurgents who are recruited
from impoverished rural areas that have been historically underdeveloped by the
government. The problem is that this situation becomes self-sustaining as the
decreasing security situation created by the insurgency also decreases the likelihood of
other more legitimate forms of employment emerging. This makes recruitment easy,
despite the necessity of a political justification. It is further exacerbated by the existence
of an illicit natural resource, which can be used in order to continue funding the war,
called the “rentier” model. FARC policy since the 1980’s has promoted the taxing of coca
cultivation as well as involvement in its production and transport, providing a lucrative
source of income with which to fund the insurgency.

9

As previously mentioned, civil society is typically portrayed as a positive concept
and its many benefits have been expounded upon extensively. However, the problem
with this conception is that it does not consider the “darker side” of civil society, which
emerges when groups attempt to change the political system through violent means, as
is often the case in war. Or the consideration of to what extent did civil society
organizations accelerate the conflict or impede peace. Thus, most discussions regarding
civil society in conflict countries discuss it as the “antithesis of war” or the deterioration
of avenues of association. However, just because there is extensive violence inhibiting
the production of a “productive civil society”, or one that creates positive externalities
for society, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. During periods of conflict, CSOs come to
occupy some of the roles meant for the State. It is even argued that when a society is
corrupted, CSOs adapt to working in an illegal economy and engage in corrupt practices.
In the case of Colombia during the course of the conflict, CSOs did exist. The key
distinction is that they used violence to bring about their goals, but even so all of the
armed groups fit the definition of a civil society organizations and served as the “state”
in the rural areas where they operated. Further, they argue that their “corruption” or
utilization of violence as a means to air grievances was due to the corrupted society that
promulgated their exclusion.
Politicians regulate the way in which the populace can engage with the
government, called “political opportunity structures.” There are three different avenues
for engagement, the legal channel prescribed by the politicians, the extralegal but
accepted methods, and forbidden, or explicitly illegal methods. The selection amongst
the three different channels for engagement by civil society organizations depends upon
whether they consider the political system to be legitimate. Legitimacy means that
“those who are ruled believe that the rulers have a right...to implement their decisions
by force if necessary.” In the case of Colombia, the emergence of these groups is rooted
in a historical political exclusion. This exclusion serves as the basis of their rejection of
the political system of legitimate, thus justifying extra legal means in promoting their
claims. This explains the precise import of the 1991 Constitution, and why it was
successful in the demobilization of several armed groups. The State, by allowing direct
election of the 70 members of the National Constituent Assembly, and consequently
holding said assembly to rewrite the Constitution, created acceptable legal channels for

10

the claims of the illegal armed groups. By taking these first steps, and tying group’s
inclusion to their demobilization, the State reinforced the usage of legal means to
discuss grievances. The rewriting of the Constitution served, as an admission that it was
no longer considered legitimate, and needed to be updated in order to recreate the
State’s legitimacy. This allowed for those CSOs, who violent activities created various
negative externalities, to bring attention to several issues resolved in the new
constitution, to shift from a primarily “unproductive” to “productive” CSOs. For
example, Quintin Lame demobilized, an indigenous militant group. This was partly
beause of their ability to elect a representative to the Constituent Assembly and the
subsequent inclusion of indigenous rights’ protection in the 1991 Constitution. This
recreated state legitimacy, paramount for increasing state capacity.
However, some argue that these “unproductive” CSOs (also referred to as “uncivil
society”) actually play an important role due to their provocation of “productive” CSOs
to act. They also contend that due to the fact that many organizations participate in
multiple activities, distinguishing between the “civil” and “uncivil” aspects is not a useful
task. This duality can be seen in the fact that while the illegal armed actors such as the
FARC have spurred much violence and turmoil, they have promoted the issue of
inequality in society particularly when it comes to the agrarian sector. Despite this not
being their primary motivation, agrarian reform is one of the six points on the current
peace accord. So while war does tend to reduce the space for association, it creates a
reaction against it. Furthermore, in the absence of a functioning state, as was the case in
Colombia for a long time, self-organization becomes vital. It is important to recognize
that civil society contains these elements, while it detracts from the overall positive
connotation associated with the concept, understanding how its negative elements
interact with its positive ones is actually useful for differentiating which policies
promote which aspects.
The fact remains however, that a productive civil society (one that creates
positive externalities for society) is necessary to achieve a sustainable peace. A
sustainable peace is one where there are no more flare-ups of violence. While the
unproductive aspects may spur the creation of new movements, they cannot be present
in the long run as they contribute to instability through their violent methods and are
therefore counter-productive. It has also been proven that during conflict these

11

unproductive (or uncivil) elements dominate and inhibit participation in productive
CSOs. Civic engagement is the percentage of a population actively involved in a
CSO. Anderson found that conflict countries have the lowest civic engagement with an
average of only 38.2% of the population participating compared with 47.3% for
countries that have been in post-conflict for more than 11 years. While this study suffers
from the general flaw in civil society literature, which excludes those “darker” elements,
and the inclusion of membership in guerrilla organizations would parallel which side of
civil society could be considered stronger. However, it is beneficial in demonstrating the
effect conflict has on what has traditionally been referred to as civil society, which is
truly referring to its productive elements Furthermore, the importance of a productive
civil society in promoting a negotiated settlement to conflict, as well as in the
transitional and post-conflict phase has been well-documented. Peace agreements that
address historical grievances such as structural injustices are more sustainable. The
inclusion of civil society leads to higher quality peace agreements, with greater
legitimacy. Violence creates fear and intimidation in the population, prevention
association due to limited interactions. It destroys the social fabric of society by creating
“in” and “out” groups. These divisions and the violence make the public sphere unsafe
for citizens to exercise their rights of expression and association. This paralyzes
collective /social initiatives. Conflicts disrupt the nature of state, market and civil society
relations. Civil society works to heal those disruptions in three different ways: (i) as
conduits of change, (ii) as substitutes for government, and (iii) as conflict preventers,
peacemakers and builders.
(i) Conduits of Change
During conflict, CSOs promote fostering acceptance of a political solution to end
the conflict as a best option. This can “ripen” the conflict by shifting public opinion away
from militaristic endeavors. During peace negotiations, civil society can help to ensure
that structural injustices and the root causes of the conflict are addressed. Publicly held
dialogues on the issues can pressure official negotiators by providing explicit knowledge
of populace preferences. This can provide leverage for negotiators when there is a
stalemate, as they can look to a third party for the true solution instead of abstracted
speculation. Furthermore civil society can contribute to a collective understanding of the

12

nature and causes of violence and establishing the truth of past crimes through the
construction of historical memory narratives. Engagement of civil society during
peacemaking phase critical for success in a post-conflict scenario. Waiting for peace to
include civil society weakens the peace agreement and squanders the resources
available.
(ii) Substitutes for government
In peacebuilding efforts, CSOs can play various different roles when the
government is unable too, such as citizen protection, accountability monitoring,
advocacy, socialization, rebuilding communities, intermediation between the state and
citizens, and service delivery. However, not all these roles are always necessary and their
utilization depends upon what stage of conflict the society is in. Priorities shift during
periods of armed conflict or reconstruction, for example during a crisis where basic
security is threatened, CSOs will shift their efforts to attend to the most pressing needs
of those whom they represent. Other examples of the role of civil society during a
conflict or post-conflict scenario are raising public awareness, creating and promoting
alternative media, watchdog roles during elections, youth and female empowerment,
education reforms and peace education, establishing peace cultures, demobilization,
disarmament, protection and reintegration of endangered individuals, human rights
monitoring, documentation of war crimes, trauma and psycho-social support, and
transitional justice initiatives.
(iii) Conflict preventers/peace builders
In a post-conflict situation, where the goal of civil society is to prevent conflict
and maintain peace, the array of mechanisms available to address the past are called
“transitional justice mechanisms.” Official recognition of the human rights violations
that occurred in the past help to deepen democracies through stronger rule of law
achieved through prosecution also provides justice and serves as a deterrent.
Transitional justice mechanisms all work “to avoid repeating, re-enacting or reliving
past horrors; deter future violations; and restore the dignity of citizens victimized by
atrocity.” The primary mechanisms employed in transitional justice are trials, truth
commissions and amnesties. A shared interested in wanting to end violence, establish

13

peace and rebuild and heal society ensures civil society’s presence in post-conflict
transitions. Thus, civil society has played an important role in promoting and
supporting transitional justice. In these cases, the strength of civil society is a good
predictor of the likelihood of success in these efforts. Civil society can affect the
outcome of the employment of transitional justice mechanisms through several
functions such as promoting public discussion, prioritizing state needs, mobilizing the
masses, or providing important local knowledge and context. But there are also other
factors that can predict outcomes, such as “the severity and nature of past violence, type
of transition to peace, the background of political leaders, the state of the economy, and
the presence of international governmental and non-governmental organizations.”
Ultimately transitional justice mechanisms also help to strengthen civil society itself.
Civil Society in Bogotá
Over the course of a week in Bogotá, seven CSOs were interviewed. The seven
organizations provide a wide-ranging sampling of the types of organizations to be found
in Bogotá, though it was by no means exhaustive. This allows for an understanding of
what the general consensus amongst organizations is, not just a sub-sector. The
organizations included (as well as their primary function) were: Bogotá Como Vamos
(quality of life watchdog), CINEP (think tank), DIAL (platform for international
agencies,), Fundacion DIS (not for profit business skills consulting for CSOs), ICTJ
(transitional justice), OCASA (corruption and youth empowerment), Yo Creo en
Colombia (peace movement). Interviews consisted of selected organization’s
representatives describing their purpose, and then answering questions regarding civil
society in Colombia.1 The responses and data obtained from the interviews will be
evaluated against the CIVICUS five dimensions of their Civil Society Index as well as the
Johns Hopkins Center for Civil Society criteria, in order to establish an idea as to the
general stage of development of Colombian civil society. Comparisons about its
development can also be drawn with the original JHCNSP report on civil society in
Colombia from 1998. Using two different metrics allows for greater confidence and
reliability in the findings. These discussions are primarily qualitative as they are based

1 Appendix 1: Interviews

14

off of observations, however the occurrence amongst the seven organizations of a
particular opinion could be indicative of a high rate of incidence amongst CSOs.
Interviewing more organizations would increase the likelihood of these findings not
being anomalous.
CIVICUS is a non-profit organization that studies civil society globally. The
CIVICUS four dimensions of the civil society index are, (i) the structure of civil society,
(ii) the external environment in which it exists, (iii) the values practiced and promoted,
and (iv) the impact of activities pursued.2 Each of these dimensions has several sub-
dimensions that will be useful in guiding the discussion about Bogotá civil society in a
more systematic manner. In CIVICUS’ formal assessment, each sub-dimension is made
up of indicators that are measured by their team of specialists. For the purposes of this
discussion, the point of analysis will be the sub-dimensions.
The first dimension (i), structure, is made up of six sub-dimensions, each of
which will be discussed individually.3 (1) Breadth of Citizen Participation, the idea of
“two” Colombia’s existing in tandem was brought up in several of the discussions with
CSOs. It appears that there is a portion of the population that is very actively engaged
and participative. But that the other, much larger, half of society is completely
disinterested. As was discussed in the literature review, Anderson found lower levels of
citizen participation amongst in-conflict countries than when compared to countries in
post-conflict for eleven years or more. The participation rate in conflict countries was
38.2%. This seems to be consistent with Bogotá, who despite its very vibrant and large
community of CSOs is unable to attract the attention of those who are not already
involved in this discussion. A second dimension, (2) Depth of citizen participation,
provides a more positive assessment of Bogotá’s CSOs. For those who do participate,
they are very active. Philanthropic donations and volunteers mostly support these
organizations. Fundacion DIS pointed out that the concept of volunteerism is new.
Colombians typically rely upon family or neighbors to help out in times of need. This is a
manifestation of low societal trust. But overall the depth of citizen participation could be
considered very high, as it is only measured amongst those already participating. (3)
Diversity within civil society is incredibly high in Colombia. As previously discussed,

2

Civicus
CSI
Paper
Series
Volume
2
Issue
1,
p7

3

Civicus…””,
p18

15

when the state is weak civil society will often step in to provide services. In Colombia,
organizations have evolved to take on most challenges. Simply in the seven
organizations that were interviewed there was a huge variety in their purposes and
structures. This is partly due to how easy it is to create a CSO in Colombia. There is no
government oversight, no national registrar, and this has created problems. But for the
specific goal of diversity, these lax regulations allowed for the proliferation of every type
of organization. However, there is a much higher concentration overall of Peace and
Reconciliation organizations amongst those referred to in the interviews. But this is
consistent with the creation of alternative institutions when government fails to provide
them. (4) Level of organization, is low. Fragmentation or disorganization was cited most
often as the biggest weakness of civil society. A lack of social capital and low levels of
generalized trust were cited as possible sources for this fragmentation. Another aspect
that was posited as a cause for this lack of trust was the increasing competition for
financial resources amongst institutions. Overall, the sector is not well organized
because the government has no national registry. It is impossible to know how many
CSOs exist in Colombia. Therefore, while there are many very well organized CSOs, the
sector as a whole is fragmented and disconnected. It refuses to associate and therefore
attempts to organize have been slow and this pace is likely to persist. Dimension (5)
Inter-relations, is related to the previous point. The inter-relations amongst CSOs will
likely dictate the level of organization. In Bogotá, all of the organizations cited
partnerships and the importance of alliances. Interestingly, CINEP was an organization
founded by the Jesuits over forty years ago, evidencing the persistent influence of the
Catholic Church in civil society. Further, they commented that all of their strongest
alliances where with other Jesuit organizations. This proves that association is possible,
but that trust takes a very long time to build up. Newer organizations cited frustrations
with competition for funding creating jealousy and generating mistrust amongst
organizations. This point relates directly to the final dimension of the structure
component, (6) resources, new strains on funding are due to Colombia’s recent
reclassification as a middle income country and the supposed winding down of the
conflict as shown by the peace talks in Havana. This has led to a disqualification of
Colombia from several international organization’s areas of work because of the
perception that the problem has been at least partially resolved. However, this has led to

16

weaknesses in the sector as a whole as its growth was fuelled in large part due to
incredible levels of international financial support. Now that this support is beginning to
dwindle, there is much higher competition for funding which is impeding the
development of trust and relationships.
The second dimension (ii), environment, is important because it is the context in
which civil society grows.4 Without a supportive environment, civil society is threatened
or considerably weakened. First there is the (1) political context. The 1991 Constitution
was only referred to explicitly once, but several cited “key reforms” that were passed in
the 90’s as essential processes in the democratic opening that led to a truly
representative and participatory democracy. Prior to this period, as was discussed
previously, formal methods for participation were quite limited due to the Frente
Nacional. Yet, every interviewee described an explosion in the number of CSOs that
operated in Colombia during the 1990’s. This was one of Colombian civil society’s
strengths, its vibrancy and sheer size, due to the unrestricted right to create a non-profit
organization very easily. While the possibility of making the requirements stricter was
discussed by one organization in particular (Fundacion DIS), the majority seemed to
believe that making it more restrictive was hindering civil society development. That the
1991 Constitution conferred upon the people a right to associate that absolutely
enshrines this method of participation, it also opened the political landscape for the
emergence of new parties. What OCASA suggested instead was to promote greater
transparency amongst CSOs, in order to create informal norms regarding which are the
legitimate (or willing to disclose information) organizations and which are the
illegitimate ones, or “garage NGO’s” as they call them. These “garage NGO’s” are a
negative externality of this lack of regulation, and are essentially tax-shelters. This has
occurred because of a higher incidence of political foundations established without any
social goals but with the purpose of making money. So, new laws ensuring the right to
associate and mechanisms for participation have been implemented in the political
context, but the rampant widespread corruption still provides challenges to CSO
legitimacy. Colombia’s corruption is tracked by Transparency International gave it a

4

Civicus
“”
p
19

17

score of 36/100 (0 = “highly corrupt”) and ranked it 94/177 for corruption in 2013.5 This
indicates that corruption is indeed still a big problem for Colombia, corruption inhibits
strong rule of law, which weakens generalized trust. The next dimension, (2) Basic
freedoms and rights, refers to specifically the laws that protect the rights of the people of
Colombia. This component also encompasses some of the discussion from the prior sub-
dimension. Many more rights to association were created and guaranteed through the
1991 Constitution. But then the era of Uribe, described quite negatively by three
organizations, truly began to limit the ability of CSOs to function because of his
denunciations of any human rights organization as “leftist.” This created a widespread
negative perception of CSOs that they are still working to overcome. However, the 2009
Victim’s Reparation Law was mentioned as an important step forward in the
government’s recognition of victim rights. While the laws now exist in order to protect
and guarantee certain rights which allow for the growth of civil society, implementation
has been more difficult. While many people have been given back their lands, or
received compensation from the government, many more remain. Furthermore
corruption has been an issue, as government officials in municipalities will often divert
reparations to their own charitable foundations. But overall, if an organization
mentioned Santos, it was to say what an improved political context for he had fostered
CSOs in comparison to his predecessor. The (3) the socio-economic context of Colombia
was not even discussed as all participants in the interview were well aware of the bloody
civil conflict that has been raging in the country for the past fifty years. A recent change
is the new classification of Colombia as a middle-income country. This is positive and
negative, positive because it indicates a more generalized improvement overall in
Colombia, but negative because this classification perhaps does not reflect all parts of
the country equally and huge disparities in wealth remain. This negative component is
in addition to the previously mentioned unintended consequence of decreased
international aid. The (4) socio-cultural context, regards to social capital. Social capital
through iterated interactions generates trust. Trust is the basis of civil society. So how
conducive are socio-cultural norms in Colombia to civil society? The interviews
supplemented the proposition that generalized trust in Colombia is incredibly low and

5

http://www.transparency.org/country#COL

18

traditional norms are not accustomed to volunteerism or an idea of civic engagement.
Most of the CSOs included an educational component amongst their various capabilities.
Whether this was in peace education, corruption education, or basic civilities, education
was often cited as an important step in order to make peace sustainable. This lack of
trust, disinterest or apathy is the result of exhaustion on behalf of the Colombian
populace. Havana represents the fourth attempt at a peace negotiation. Exhaustion is
expected, particularly because the mass demonstrations of civic participation such as
the 1997 March for Peace didn’t result in peace. There is no clear understanding on
behalf of the general populace as to precisely what civil society is, or how it benefits
them. Thus, through education, CSOs are attempting to shift the norms to instill the
concept of civic responsibility. The (5) dimension, legal environment, has already been
discussed in terms of the political context. There are no longer constraints on CSO
advocacy activities, and the government/military/guerrillas often engage with CSOs.
CINEP, which is perhaps the most well respected and widely known amongst the
selected organizations, runs a human rights abuses database. The military and Vice-
Presidency often consult CINEP and their data in order to better understand where, how,
when and by whom these abuse are perpetrated. (6) State and civil society relations
appear to be quite high under the Santos administration. While there are many state-
funded CSOs, none of the ones in the sample are. However, perhaps one of the most
important CSOs, that is state funded, is the National Center for Historical Memory. As
the ICTJ and transitional justice literature points out, identifying the abuses of the past
and remembering them is essential to ensure that they do not happen again. The
National Center for Historical Memory released a report this past summer of a
comprehensive memory of the conflict. It found that over 250,000 Colombians have
died throughout the course of the conflict (mostly civilians), millions have been
displaced and that while government forces committed most of the deaths, guerrillas are
disproportionately responsible for kidnappings.6 But the mere fact that a government
organization, albeit it didn’t start out as one, is not only promoting a historical memory
but also publishing it for widespread distribution is a positive indicator of state-civil

6

Centro
Nacional
de
Memoria
Historica

http://www.centrodememoriahistorica.gov.co/descargas/informes2013/bastaYa/basta-‐ya-‐memorias-‐guerra-‐
dignidad-‐12-‐sept.pdf

19

society relations today. It is also evidence of a massive shift towards a more conciliatory
tone than was taken during the Uribe administration. Finally (7) private sector-civil
society relations. This sub-dimension actually appears to be quite high or positive in
Colombia. Only Bogotá Como Vamos received funding from the private sector directly
(for example El Tiempo, the largest national newspaper), and this appeared to be partly
because these private sources benefit from the activities of this non-profit. However,
that doesn’t detract from the nobility of the goal of Bogotá Como Vamos, and they do
have autonomy in their operations. Where both organizations can benefit, or create
shared value, partnerships such as these appear to be a net positive. However,
Fundacion DIS, supplements their non-profit work by consulting for the private sector
on their corporate social responsibility programs. While these discussions weren’t all
that common in the private sector in the 1990’s there is a high level of interest now. Of
the 100 most important businesses in Colombia, most have a charitable foundation and
if not a strong corporate social responsibility program. Overall the environment for civil
society in Colombia appears to have become more favorable in the past twenty years,
largely due to political/legal norm shifts and the emergence of new types of leaders.
The third dimension (iii) is values, or the principles adhered to, practiced and
promoted by civil society.7 This aspect relates to the dominance of “unproductive”
versus “productive” CSOs, instead of making assumptions about civil society
automatically being “good.” The values of civil society can vary, and only when the
dominant organizations value concepts such as democracy, tolerance and justice, and
actively promote them, can democracy be strengthened. The first sub-dimension is (1)
democracy. Of the CSOs interviewed, they were either structured democratically in
terms of their internal structure, or were run like a business. Fundacion DIS and CINEP
for example, are run more like a business organization, while OCASA and others that are
smaller have a closer-knit community that function very democratically. CSOs also are
involved in promoting democracy at the societal level. They do this through education
programs, research publications, forums, roundtables, and documentaries. For example,
ICTJ created a documentary that describes the importance of transitional justice
mechanisms. They show this documentary at universities. An interesting conclusion that

7 Civicus 20

20

Anderson comes to is that countries that don’t have conflict tend to have a less engaged
population.8 This could be perhaps due to the fact that a conflict tends to remove rights
and create more restrictions, thus leading to greater valuation amongst the population
of those rights. Where democratic participation is more limited, as was the case in
Colombia prior to 1991, the populace desires it more than in places where it has never
been limited. The second sub-dimension (2), Transparency, is a problem in Colombia.
As was mentioned before, the problem of corruption is rampant. OCASA works
specifically to improve transparency and give youths the tools to empower themselves
and fight corruption. Further, they are promoting transparency in the CSO sector itself
as a means to counter the growing number of “garage NGO’s.” In 2003, Colombia’s
transparency international score was 39/100 and its rank was 59/133.9 This shows that
in the last ten years corruption has actually moderately decreased in Colombia as it was
ranked 94/177 in 2013 with a score of 36. Next, (3) tolerance has perhaps been one of
the biggest issue in the process of attempting to end the conflict. Despite the
government’s best efforts, they are unable to control conservative more radical factions,
which form the paramilitary groups. These groups assassinate human rights leaders,
unionists and anyone that may be considered a “leftist sympathizer.” Intolerance in
society at large for guerrillas in politics led to the massacre of the UP in the 1980’s and
while this level of intolerance has decreased, paramilitaries still exist. Not only does
their presence harm rule of law but also hinders the efforts of organizations working to
change cultural norms regarding tolerance. ICTJ deals with these issues of transitional
justice, and preaches reconciliation and acceptance as necessary for sustainable peace.
(4) Non-violence is a related aspect, prior to 1991 civil society was made up mostly of
organizations that felt that violence was the only way to participate. The government has
institutionalized their exclusion through the Frente Nacional. Violent forces definitely
still exist in Colombia’s civil society sector, but the number and strength of these
organizations has been dramatically reduced since 1991. (5) Gender equity, this sub-
dimension was actually not discussed by any of the organizations. However, most of the
individuals interviewed (5/7) were women and a strong women’s movement exists.10

8 Anderson
9 Transparency International Annual Report 2003

10

Global
Network
of
Women
Peacebuilders

21

The next component (6), poverty eradication, was also not discussed explicitly. Other
CSOs do exist in Colombia to help the poor, but many of the CSOs did describe the
importance of a strong civil society in helping the most marginalized members of society.
Furthermore, the high cost of volunteering was discussed, as those with lower incomes
simply cannot afford to participate. However, many of the regional CSOs that exist are
in largely impoverished rural communities. Therefore these costs are likely to depend on
the environment. Finally, (7) environmental sustainability is a nascent movement in
Colombia. None of the CSOs interviewed described environmental sustainability
explicitly. However, CINEP described it as one of their research areas for fieldwork.
CSOs that deal with only environmental issues do exist in Bogotá, there are just not very
many. Further, environmental issues are more visible in rural regions that have
subjected to pesticide spraying, deforestation, mining, etc. and are thus more likely to
have built up alternative institutions than in Bogotá. In conclusion, over the past twenty
years the dominant values of this sector have evolved. Prior to 1991, the general
consensus regarding participation amongst the largest and most visible groups was that
violence was the answer. Once democracy became available to them, they began a
widespread effort to strengthen democracy through CSOs. There was a shift in the
perception of civil society, prior to 1991 CSOs were mostly unproductive, promoting the
use of violence and fuelling insecurity, which impedes the development of trust. But
after 1991, many armed groups demobilized, only the most stubborn remained and lost
any remaining legitimacy due to their lack of adherence to the values they claimed to
support i.e. democratic inclusion. Now the CSO landscape is threatened by a different
type of organizations, the “garage NGO’s” that do not have social priorities but are
rather taking advantage of the system for personal gain. However, the majority of CSOs
rigidly practice the values they preach.
The final dimension (iv), impact, looks at the tangible effects civil society has
had.11 By focusing on how much civil society has prioritized a particular area, and what
effects this has had. The first sub-dimension, (1) influencing public policy, is difficult to
quantify. However, the 1997 “paz mandato” or mandate for peace where 10 million
people voted to hold peace negotiations is an example of the citizenry influencing public

11

Civicus
21

22

policy. Ten years later, following an overly simplistic demobilization law for
paramilitaries put forward by Uribe, civil society acted in concert to modify the law’s
failings and recognize the victims. This led to the Victim’s Law in 2009. So while civil
society is generally disorganized, it is able to unite when it comes to certain issues. DIAL,
as a platform for international organizations, has direct contacts with the government
and regularly met with the vice-president under Uribe and now meets with the Minister
of Planning. Next, (2) holding state and private corporations accountable, is more
abstract. There are certainly numerous watchdog organizations, especially in terms of
human rights and the CINEP database is certainly a good example of this type of
function. However, the high level of corruption still present in society indicates that
while the situation may be improving, there is still not very high accountability by the
state. The widespread interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) programs
described by Fundacion DIS perhaps is indicative of a greater sense of accountability in
the business community. If CSR programs are the norm, not having a CSR program
could become a liability. Next, (3) responding to social interests, examines civil society’s
responsiveness to majority opinion. The expansive types of organizations found, serving
all interests, is indicative of a highly responsive civil society. Despite there being some
CSOs that preach intolerance and violence, this is in response to certain sects of society
which believe in those methods. Just because they are unproductive does not mean they
should be discounted, and exemplifies the high level of responsiveness. (4) Empowering
citizens, relates to education and information distribution. All of the organizations cited
problems reaching most of the population. These organizations suffer from a self-
selected bias, as those who are interested are likely interested due to prior knowledge.
Attempting to recruit new people to the cause is difficult because the pool is limited to
those who would be interested, but are simply unaware. The larger problem is that there
is a general sense of apathy. However, all of the organizations interviewed included
some sort of educational program as essential to their operations and promoting
knowledge. OCASA specifically provides tools of empowerment for youths. Finally, (5)
meeting societal needs is civil society’s contribution to addressing the most pressing
social problems. In Colombia, the biggest problem is the conflict and the violence it has
produced. It creates a self-sustaining cycle as violence creates fear and mistrust,
breaking down avenues for association and perpetuating violence. The dominant

23

presence in the CSO sector is organizations related to peace and reconciliation. Even
amongst the CSOs interviewed, despite their varying functions, they were all loosely
related to the promotion of peace. Overall the impact of civil society since 1991 has been
tremendous in agenda setting and meeting the needs of the populace.
Conclusions
Colombia has always been democratic. History shows us an incredible dedication to the
project of democracy. While the rest of Latin America suffered military dictatorships,
Colombia was mired in party conflict which led to a caretaker military leader that
stepped down immediately once peace was reached. It is this incredible dedication and
innovation which has led to the emergence of such a robust civil society movement.
While the Church used to be predominantly in charge of these organizations, and still
does play an important role, a variety of new and autonomous actors entered the scene
following the 1991 Constitution. This important legal foundation created the various
mechanisms needed by society to support the construction of an ample civil society. The
state cannot artificially create civil society, it can also create the conditions under which
it flourishes. Increase in security and a greater number of avenues for participation have
allowed for Colombian civil society to expand its capacity, size, and composition
dramatically. The CIVICUS indicators provide a basis for understanding what civil
society in Bogotá looks like. These four dimensions of impact, environment, values and
structure provided the basis for an analysis of civil society. Anderson’s study of different
types of countries when compared to their CSI scores, found that there is movement
along a continuum for most of the indicators. That civil society becomes stronger in each
respect as it moves from conflict, to post conflict of less than ten years and post conflict
greater than eleven years. Based upon the case study of Colombia, it appears that this
finding is correct. Civil society in Colombia has generally improved in relation to the
dimensions discussed. The pivotal moment appears to have been the 1991 Constitutional
reform, since then civil society has become more self-aware and adapted to the changing
context of Colombia’s conflict. The aim of this study was to understand what civil society
in Bogotá looks like in order to understand whether or not it was “ready” for a post-
conflict scenario. While “ready” is an incredibly subjective term, as the ICTJ points out,

24

Colombia has already successfully demobilized thousands of militants from other armed
groups, not to mention paramilitaries. Furthermore, civil society’s self-awareness brings
a greater sense of responsibility. None of the organizations wanted to speak for civil
society as a whole, saying that that was an impossible task due to the variety of interests
that exist there. Also, the high degree of responsiveness to civilian demands and
adaptability over the years to changing conditions and issues of funding, shows a strong
resilience. In consideration of all of these factors, Colombian civil society is indeed ready
to take upon itself the task of rebuilding the social fabric of society in the event a peace
agreement between the FARC and the government is signed. In fact, CINEP and ICTJ
are already preparing themselves as organizations for the new demands that will be
placed upon them in a post-conflict scenario. Despite the darkness, violence and
pessimism that pervades Colombia, there is hope, in the form of a consolidated and
productive civil society working in tandem with the government and private sector for a
sustainable peace.

25

Bibliography
Anderson, Tracy. Exploring Civil Society in Conflict and Post-Conflict Countries. In Civil
Society, Conflict and Violence: Insights from the CIVICUS Civil Society Index Project.
Regina List and Wolfgang Dorner.
Bouvier, Virginia. Civil Society Roles in Conflict Zones. April 22, 2013.
Center for Systematic Peace. 2013. http://www.systemicpeace.org/warlist.htm#.
Accessed: 11/1/13
Chandhoke, Neera. Aug 2007. Civil Society. Development in Practice 17(4/5):607-614.
Collier, Paul and Anke Hoeffler. 2002. Greed and Grievance in Civil War. Oxford
Economic Papers. 56(4):563-595
Fernandez, Carlos, Garcia-Duran, Mauricio and Fernando Sarmiento. Peace
Mobilization in Colombia: 1978-2002. 2004. Accord Issue 14. 2004.
Fukuyama, Francis (2001). Social capital, civil society, and development. Third World
Quarterly 22(1):7-20.
Global Network of Women Peacebuilders. Security Council Resolution 1325: Civil
Society Monitoring Report 2011, Colombia.
Grabe, Vera. Peace Processes 1990-4. Accord Issue 14. 2004.
Kaldor, Mary, Kostovicova, Denisa and Yahia Said. War and Peace: The Role of Global
Civil Society. 94-111.
Heinrich, Volkhart Finn. Assessing and Strengthening Civil Society Worldwide: Project
Description of CIVICUS Civil Society Index. Civicus Civil Society Index Paper Series (2)1.
Kopecky, Petr and cas Mudde. 2003. Rethinking Civil Society. Democratization 10(3):1-
14.
List, Regina and Wolfgang Dorner.Civil Society, Conflict and Violence. In Civil Society,
Conflict and Violence: Insights from the CIVICUS Civil Society Index Project.
Olsen, Tricia D., Payne, Leigh A. and Andrew G. Reiter. An Exploratory Analysis of Civil
Society and Transitional Justice. in “Civil Society Conflict and Violence”
Pfaffenholz, Thania, Kew, Darren and Anthony Wanis-St. John. Civil Society and Peace
Negotiations: Why, Whether and How they could be involved. 2006
Posso, Camilo Gonzalez. Negotiations with the FARC 1982-2002. Accord Issue 14. 2004.
Rodriguez, Jorge Rojas. Political peacebuilding a challenge for civil society. Accord Issue
14. 2004.

26

Transparency International. Annual Global Transparency Report. 2013.
Transparency International. Annual Global Transparency Report. 2003.
Villar, Rodrigo. “Defining The Nonprofit Sector: Colombia.” Working Papers of the
Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project, no. 29 edited by Lester M.
Salamon and Helmut K. Anheier. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Institute for Policy
Studies, 1998.
Villar, Rodrigo, List, Regina and Lester M. Salamon. Chapter 21 colombia: A diverse
nonprofit sector. In Global Civil Socities. Johns Hopkins. 1999.
World Movement for Democracy. Defending Civil Society, Colombia County Report
Summary. 2009.

27

Appendix 1: Interview Transcripts
Bogotá Como Vamos 8/12/13
Maria: Nosotros no estamos vinculados de ninguna forma, ella esta vinculada en el
sentido que la dieron plata para poder hacer esto.
Casey: Si, solo me apoyaron pero no, no necesitan ninguna cosa de mi, solamente..
Maria: Y lo hacemos por gusto, pues no tenemos, no es para nota o nada
Casey: Nuestro Interes
BCV: Para una publicacion?
Maria: Depronto publicamos algo despues, pero no es para una nota no es para un
proyecto para la Universidad, no es un requisito mejor dicho
BCV: no es de universidad, es un estudio proprio?
Casey: Si, tengo el apoyo de la institución pero es solo esso, apoyo para poder
desarrollar esta investigación
BCV: Pues mira, les voy a contar entonces. Bogotá como vamos es una politica publica,
como tal, lleva quince anos funcionande, cuenta en el apoyo de cuatro organizaciones:
entonces la fundacion corona, el tiempo, la Javeriana, y la camara de comercio de
Bogotá. Son las cuatro associaciones como socias fundadores del programa. Y
básicamente lo que se quere hacer es medir la calidad de vida de Bogotános. Para eso
entonces, tenemos varios productos entonces uno es el informe de calidad de vida, anual,
que es un ¿ productos. La encuesta ciudadana mida la calidad de vida como sus
objetivos, hacer una encuesta, o una muestra de mil quinientas personas, hacen
diferentes preguntas para medir la percepción de la calidad de vida en la población en
Bogotá. Y eso es un do los principales productos, pero algunas veces hacemos diferentes
reuniones y eventos por ejemplo mesas temáticas, foros, sobre alguna tema que
consideramos importante que lo tiene la agenda publica. No se, espaco publico, la
[unintelligble] de vacunas en Bogotá, entonces, … ahorita … criar como espacios de
discusión. No como tal, estamos dentro de, de la organización privada, porque estamos
en el tercer sector, tenemos autonomia. Hayy un cuadro tecnico. [unintelligble] Pues
Bogotá como vamos tiene autonomia en esso. Listo. Grosso modo esse es el programa.
Maria: Como lograron la auspician (¿) de corona, el tiempo, la Javeriana y la camara de
comercio?
BCV: Javeriana si muy curioso poco, dos anos talvez. Estas fueron tres instituciones que
querían medir la calidad de vida en Bogotá.
Maria: Mi pregunta es, eran ellos, o fue una persona, no se si tu o no se, el presidente o
el fundador, recorre ellos o ellos querían hacer esto?
BCV: Ellos querían hacer esto.
Casey: Entonces era un proyecto de ellos?
BCV: Era un proyecto de ellos.
Maria: Ok, eso fue como para ...[unintelligible]
BCV: Entonces, hacer un programa que no esta vinculada directamente a por ejemplo la
camara de comercio le da certa autonomia a el programa. Por que el programa va
responder a si mismo. Pero por las otras directores que tienen los otros fundadores que
eran de recursos economicos y hay directrices tecnicas.

28

Maria: Y corona me parece muy interessante porque ellos tienen la fundacion corona
que esta super de sociedad civil..
BCV: Es la fundacion corona, es un programa de la fundacion corona
Casey: Y como escojen que temas son importantes?
BCV: Todas las temas son importantes. Son de calidad de vida. Medimos todas las temas.
Son 17 sectores, vale, entonces tienes educacion, inclusivo, todos los tienes. En este
momente pues estamos dando una miraje que queremos mas enfoce poblacional, y el
perspectivo genero. Que no los estaban midiendo. Listo, para lo que usted quere. Pero
hay diferentes temas, tienes espaco publico. Todos las temas de la calidad de vida
urbana.
Maria: Ustedes son como una organizacion diferente, como con toda las preguntas que
lo que hacemos, porque, las otras son como a la nivel nacional, pero esta nos interesse
mucho porque lo que nos estamos dando cuenta es como la falta de associacion de los
colombianos. Estamos viendo que es muy poco lo que se associacion, muy poco, si, se
associacion y son muy apaticos
BCV: Han visto el estudio de la capital social?
Casey: No
BCV: Tenien que verlo. El ultimo estudio de la capital social.
Maria: Lo acaban de sacar?
BCV: Vera Cruz
Casey: fundacion restrepo?
BCV: Restrepo, a si possible, capital social, es muy bueno, ya llevan dos estudios de
capital social, pues alli esta esso. Es muy debil el capital social en Colombia
Maria: De acuerdo. Y entonces, ustedes quedan, yo creo que es mas facil para ustedes
ver por lo menos, ustudes como siente que la poblacion colombiana, en este caso
Bogotána, se associase, “engaged, how do I say engaged?”
BCV: compremete-se, si
Maria: como participan? Como logran ustedes llevarle la..?
BCV: Pues mira, la cosa en Bogotá es reduzir, cada Bogotáno desconfia el otro.
[secretary walks in and hands us documents] Este es el ultimo informe de la calidad de
vida. Si queres, puedes mirar el incuesto de funcionarios que acaban de publicar, si,
sobre cultura ciudadana. Creo que le sirve mucho, y es todo el pais. Pero para el caso de
Bogotá es muy dificil porque es una sociedad muy heterogenea. Es dificil pero tambien
es un plus que tiene Bogotá. E, inicialmente, nuestras organizaciones trabajaban con
toda essa tema, de cultura ciudadana, de tratalidad de confianza del otro, pero
recientemente se a vinculado como politica publica. Se maneje muy a genio, a los
sindicadores de la ciudad. Entonces, Bogotá Como Vamos digamos, queres responder
como ejercicio de ciudadano que la gente se enter, ter una opinion calificada de las
temas de ciudad. Digamos, de essa manera tratamos que el ciudadano se este
informando, pero mas alla de que tenha confianza con otro no lo podemos hacerlo
porque no es de nuestro objetivo misional del programa. Si tratamos que tienen una
opinion calificada para que participe, [unintelligible] en las diferentes temas de la
sociedad.
Maria: Como hacen para que participen? Como hacen, para, ustedes han sentido, si
estoy da sentido, me dicieron que quando comezaron tenian que ir a ellos, para hacer las
incuestas claramente ustedes tienen que ir a la poblacion y preguntarles, queremos
saber lo estan haciendo en Bogotá para… mejorar calidad de vida, tu has sentido, no se

29

quantos anos has trabajado aqui, pero, has sentido que a medida de los anos la gente
viene mas? O no?
BCV: Venir mas? Como que?
Maria: Tenemos esta, como, yo siento que Bogotá le falta esto, no se si este sera el
espacio para hacer esto pero, el ano pasado me senti assegurada en Bogotá caminando
del sector de la 29 hasta el 130
BCV: Esso lo medimos con la incuesta de proteccion ciudadana que tiene 15 anos, y esso
es una de la preguntas que se le hace
Maria: Pero, no, ellos no vienen a ustedes? Los ciudadanos no vienen?
BCV: No porque es una incuesta..
Maria: No de acuerdo, es los metos
BCV: Es un relatorio, no puedo trajer la gente aca
Maria: Totalmente de acuerdo, Mi punto es.. si, entoonces si, me estas contestando la
pregunta porque , entonces nadie viene a ustedes. Pero, aqui venir y pensar como, “oiga
yo se que ustedes queren mejorar la calidad de vida y esto estoy sintiendo yo.”
BCV: Si, por supuesto, ustedes son un buen ejemplo….[unintelligble
Maria: Esso passa mucho? Esso es mi pregunta
BCV: Si, es constante.
Maria: ok
BCV: Si, son muy abiertos, inclusivo tenemos centro de documentacion que todo el
mundo puede mirar a consultar todas las investigaciones de Bogotá.
Maria: y ustedes…
BCV: Si, y nosotros hacemos muchos foros y seminarios, abiertos, todo el mundo puede
participar. Sobre diferentes temas de ciudadano.
Casey: Y como...como...invitan la gente para esso
BCV: Es abierto
CAsey: Si, pero como, distribuin, como la gente sabe que...
BCV: Atraves de redes sociales, atraves del Tiempo
Casey: El Tiempo, usan el Tiempo
BCV: Pues si, es que el Tiempo es un [unintelligable] Entonces viene gente. Para
inspeccion no? Y diferentes redes, redes sociales. Sempre tenemos por lo menos 300
personas
Casey: 300...si. Y se ha aumentado el númeroo de gente por los anos? Como ahora hay
mas gente que o cinco anos atras? hay menos gente?
BCV: es que depende, es que cada persona les gusta diferentes temas,como la tema de
sociedad civil si hacemos un foro de sociedad civil en Bogotá me va venir la gente que le
gusta, pero si llega una tema de espaco publico en Bogotá ustedes no irian porque
resutla que a ustedes no les gusta
Casey: Si
Maria: De acuerdo, entonces te pregunto otra vez volviendo entonces, ustedes
proponeron el tema, .... , ustudes van a poner el tema, claramento, cierto? , tema del foro,
hay alguna vez quando ... alguien de aqui de esta organizacion, y la scoiedad civil,
queren hablar de esto?
BCV: Miran, la temas siempre es estan de acuerdo con el componento tecnico por eso se
caracteriza el programa, tenemos un fuerte componiente tecnico, no podemos salir a
hablar por hablar no somos, ..miren no .. no suprote tecnico y una infraestructure para ..
hace poco inclusivo ... fueron gente de la universidad nacional quehicieronn un estudio

30

sobre seguridad en la ciudad, sobre seguridad urbana, y se mire queremos mostrar esse
estudio que el Bogotá lo conosca, vamos hacer una foro para que la gente conosca los
resultados, hacemos una mesa tecnica y despues un foro. La mesa tecnica se invita
actores publicos y privados que tienen inherencia (?) en la tema de seguridad, en la
ciudad, que diferentemente de que sean ... por el estudio, aprovechamos esse espacio
para expertos, .. de esto decidir unas temas que son importantes y despues conforam
con la ciudadania para que se entregue lo que esta passando pero fue uma iniciativa ....
Maria: Y como cuantos foros al ano tienen?
BCV: Queremos digamos, no es tan facil porque depende, depende talvez en tema
conjuntura, talvez de capacidad tecnica, de infraestrutura, .. , o muchos. Como 5 ..
hacemos foros, tambien nuestra capacidad. nuestras alianzas, la universidad de los
andes, buscamos mas alianzas ... llegarle al ciudadnao normal con informacion que
realmente le intereses, salud, van a ver esta infografia completamente diferente. En la
pagina web esta nuestro informe técnico, calidad de vida, eso fue lo que se entrego se
entrego al transmilenio se entregaron 20,000 ejemplares a todo el mundo, insertan el
periódico ADN
12:06
Maria: Ustedes que cualquier otra organización pueden saber cómo, no la población
colombiana, porque solamente lidian con Bogotá pero si saben muy bien como llegarle a
Bogotá, y ¿han notado algo como que les fue muy bien como, a los Bogotános les gusto
mucho esto? No se si es un tipo de fórum, un tipo de boletín.
BCV: La opinión cambia, como las generaciones. Tu me pregutas hace 6, 7 años como
era la fortaleza en la sociedad era minima, si todo el mundo quería que se entregara todo
eso impreso, ahora es disto, ahora es por las redes hay que buscar productos que sean
sencillos de buscar que sean fácil de descargar por la red.
Maria: ¿Bogotá ahorita dirias que es una población que mira bastante el internet?
BCV: depende como tu lo veas, Bogotá si tu lo ves el 36% subscriptores del internet en el
país están en Bogotá, pero si tu ves Bogotá como tal no todos tienen internes. Bogotá es
una ciudad muy diversa, hay sectores muy pobres donde ni siquiera tienen un
computador en las casas, entonces hay tenemos que buscar otro tipo de formato para
llegarle a la gente.
Casey: ¿Entonces como llegan a esa gente?
BCV: Entonces a esa gente le llegamos con esto por ejemplo, porque tenemos que tener
un formato que aplique a todo tipo de publico porque obvio no todo el mundo tiene
computador en la casa.
Casey: Si esa es el problema porque estamos pensando de cualquier manera encontrar la
gente pero, yo tenia una idea de un sitio de web porque en los estados unidos es lo mas
fácil para encontrar gente, pero eso no es asi, aquí es muy diferente, y entonces estamos
buscando. Yo se que trabajan con esas fundaciones siempre como el Tiempo y Corona
pero, ¿Tienen otras alianzas como otras organizaciones como no gubernamentales?
BCV: Si, desarrollamos diferentes proyectos, desarrollamos unas alianzas digamos
estratégicas, porque somos un equipo pequeño entonces buscamos con otra gente. Con
mucha ONGs también, pero ONGs que ya tienen como experiencia en el tema, si
entonces tenemos varios proyectos.
Casey: ¿Puedes dar un ejemplo?
BCV: Esta un proyecto, LAJACARTON, queremos sacar una aplicación para teléfonos
móviles en donde la gente pueda opinar sobre la calidad de vida.

31

Maria: ¿Y Mi Ciudad Ideal?
BCV: estamos trabajando inclusive con ellos, la gente ha venido a participar, pero se esta
quedando en eso en una opinión, entonces hay que transformar esa idea mas técnico.
Maria: Ahí vi en la W que decían que como, “bueno si mandan su propuesta se ganan…”
no se si como la iniciativa a los Colombianos porque el premio era una entrada a Cine
BCV: No, ahí no te podría decir, no se como debe ser la variación de la gente que aporta,
aunque el objetivo de eso es como mas comercial no.
Maria: Me intereso mucho, pero ellos tendrán el estudio en Cine..
BCV: no, no lo que quieren con nosotros es que miremos las propuestas, miremos la
variabilidad técnica que hay, porque osino también hay como mucha gente esta muy
interesada en participar pero no se convierte como algo real.
Maria: es que estamos como viendo como llegar a que la gente participe, y no participe,
pero como que de verdad la gente
BCV: Pero pues si tu miras el tema de participación, aquí es el mínimo, sobre todo en
tema de participación ciudadana. De pronto comunitaria, los encuentros son un poco
mas bajos donde capital social es mucho mas alto, si y tu lo puedes verificar
perfectamente, pues ahí es donde capital social se manifiesta allí. Pero en participación
ciudadana realmente no se si incida, mas bien la comunitaria pero mas que todo como
en infraestructura del barrio , donde la gente se organiza para las calles y todo eso para
el tema legal del barrio, para servicios públicos, esos y esos son los estudios que puedes
conseguir fácil mente, y la participación política, que también se viene reduciendo en
Bogotá.
Casey: ¿La participación es uno de sus sectores?
BCV: Nosotros
Casey: si
BCV: No, lo tomamos como referente, si nos interesa tomar el tema de participación,
política, ciudadana y comunitaria pero pues es difícil como montar indicadores.
Maria: Entonces como bueno direccionándolo un poco mas a sociedad civil, desde tu
opinión como, ¿Cómo va la sociedad civil en Colombia? Háblanos del tema, si puedes
hablar por Colombia, si puedes hablar por Bogotá
Casey: ¿Piensas que se a desarrollado mucho en con los años o que se a disminuido?
BCV: Yo creo que se a desarrollado, desde los 90 cuando lo del concepto surge y todo el
tema de la sociedad civil, pero ha tenido varios matices. Recuerden que la sociedad civil
no, la gente no sabia realmente que era sociedad civil, lo no publico era sociedad civil.
Pero cuando se origina se da el debate. Digamos que se ha dado un gran debate frente al
sector, las se han incrementado a la par de la modificación que tuvo el estado en
Colombia no, las ONGs han venido a facilitar algunas de las acciones que hacia el estado
pero entonces ya no es de terceros por ejemplo, temas de consultorías, en
investigaciones muy puntuales ahí se ve que se ha fortalecido eso. Pero como tal la
movilización de la sociedad civil esta mas mediatizada, digamos que a la gente lo
motiven a salir a marchar, ósea me acuerdo en la marcha contra las FARC y todo eso
entonces fue la mayor expresión de la sociedad civil, pero yo no te puedo decir que la
gente se identifique como parte de la sociedad civil yo hago parte de pronto de un sector,
pero ¿de cual sector, si? No inclusive hay buenos estudios de la sociedad civil para que
lean usted también.
Casey: Hemos leído mucho pero lo que pasa es que no hay de la sociedad civil en el
contexto a un conflicto.

32

BCV: Hay un buen estudio..
Casey: Si si yo se, yo se, yo lo he leído, pero de verdad solamente hay como algunos
puedes decirlos como en una mano. No hay muchos, no se ha desarrollado mucho frente
al contexto de conflicto y ese es el problema porque no hay mucho de cómo aumentar la
participación.
BVC: Tu escuchas, abrir espacios de participación en la sociedad civil, imagínate, ¿y
quien me representa a mi en ese espacio?
Maria: si, pues es por eso que queremos llevar esa idea tan abstracta de, “¿pero yo como
participo?” a en verdad “voy a participar”
BCV: Yo les recomiendo que retomen las discusiones originales, cuando busquen
espacios de participación alrededor de los 90, la ley 134 de participación ciudadana y
todo eso. Los orígenes lo que dio para que se crearan los espacios en diferentes sectores,
eso seria muy bueno que lo miraran en el tema de sociedad civil, el tema de medios de
comunicación también. Yo creo que algo que pueden valorar ahora que si afecta en a
sociedad civil para bien o para mal es todo el tema de gestiones de conocimientos y
nueva las tecnologías, esta llegando a diferentes tipos de grupos, la sociedad civil ya se
puede segmentizar, hay un target de la sociedad civil en el cual tu puedes estar.
Casey: Si, si si y eso es muy importante, pero la cosa es que pensamos que en Colombia
tiene mas valor como una voz unida sobre que quieren para Colombia. Si el sector puede
unirse y decir “esto es lo que necesitamos hacer”.
BCV: Si pero bueno, la otra también pueden averiguar es cuando se hacen los diálogos
con sindicatos y todos en parte con la sociedad civil, en esos momento los diálogos con
las FARC en en el CAGUAN habían representantes de la sociedad civil, yo creo que ahí
es la evidencia que ustedes tendrían de que se entiende por sociedad civil, además de los
gremios, miren ahí ya tiene la evidencia cuando los invitaban a participar a los diálogos.
Si yo creo que eso es importante, ahí tienen por si quieren mirar evidencia como tal.
Casey: Si, pero en este dialogo no invitaron a la sociedad civil para participar
BCV: todavía no, es la etapa inicial
Casey: Si no esa es la cosa, no. ¿Y si lo iban a invitar, quien lo va a invitar? hay un
montón de ONG un montón de organizaciones.
BCV: Si, pero igual se están tratando de pronunciar, es cuestión de organizarse
Casey: Si después de hablar con varios se ve que como el obstáculo mas grande es como
la desorganización social civil colombiana, que no esta bien organizada, entonces
Maria: No existe un registro nacional de las ONGs, no existe un órgano que, no que
regule, pero que por lo menos diga que “estamos de 10 entrevistas 5 son para la paz…
BCV: Si hay algunas iniciativas que vale la pena que las miren sobre todo hay ONGs
desde el tema de responsabilidad social, eso está muy bien organizado y lo pueden mirar,
fundaciones empresariales
Maria: Si no no no, Alpina.. es muy fuerte y en responsabilidad civil
BCV: Pero entonces, ¿si es sociedad civil, cuando vienen de los gremios?
Maria: eso es lo que estamos también evaluando
BCV: Y bajo los intereses quien define la directriz
Maria: No, y porque se crean, para beneficio de ellos, porque no tienen que pagar
impuesto
BCV: Tienen unos beneficios tributarios, pero independientemente también están
haciendo un trabajo copn comunidades, pero a beneficios de sociedad civil no tanto.

33

Casey: Y yo se que ya hablo de lo que nosotros pensamos cual es el mayor obstáculo para
la sociedad civil, pero ¿qué piensas usted para la sociedad civil, un obstáculo para
desarrollarse o fortalecerse?
BCV: Mira pues es que obstáculos no, tu puedes tener perfectamente una ONG y
participar en diferentes espacios, el obstáculo no es ese, no es la existencia. Pero como
sociedad civil es poner ya de acuerdo ya muchos intereses, es difícil es que la sociedad
civil es muy diversa y heterogenia, y más en Colombia
Casey: Si, pero ¿Cómo se puede aumentar la participación?
BCV: Mira están los espacios de participación, hay infinidad de listas de participación.
Les voy a dar un ejemplo, para la discusión del plan de desarrollo en Bogotá, una
pesadilla, el plan de desarrollo, el tema de localidades la participación es reducida, pero
la participación en el estudio nuevo de plan territorial reducido, entonces ustedes miran
estos espacios participación por regular la gente que va a esos espacios, es aquella gente
que tiene tiempo y le interesa o que tiene un interés de por medio, incluso va mucho
contratista de participación para ver que posibilidad de contrato se puede abrir.
Entonces les aconsejo que vayan a esos espacios, inclusive hay varios estudiantes de
ciencia política en la javeriana que tiene buenos estudios de temas de participación, eso
tiene la maestria en política, para que vayan allá, no se si Fernando Giraldo siga de
docente.
Maria: está todavía, si
BCV: Pues preguntale, el a trabajado mucho en esos temas de participación y sociedad
civil. Y Patricia Muñoz, y si pueden encontrarse con Rodrigo Losada en la Sergio
Arboleda, en la facultad de Ciencia Política. Ellos son los que mas saben. Rodigo Losada,
de pronto es el que mas sabe, es politólogo puro, no.
Maria ¿Y tu como, digamos ves el tema de este momento de las conversaciones en la
habana de los diálogos de paz?
BCV: Sabes que hay un tema que queda por fuera del proceso de paz, primero te digo
que es positivo, todo es positivo, independientemente de los matices que le quieren dar y
todo. Pero lo que se esta dejando de lado en el proceso de paz es y bueno y la ciudad en
el posconflicto si, porque tu vez las experiencias de desmovilización y de reinserción en
otras partes del mundo, en África y todo eso. El tema de seguridad urbana siempre
tiende a incrementarse una ves se haya finalizado el conflicto y por otro lado porque
mucha gente que esta en las armas termina movilizándose migrándose hacia las
ciudades. Generalmente la ciudades van creciendo, ahora imagínense ellos no se van a
quedar en el campo, van a terminar migrando hacia la ciudad, pero ¿La ciudad esta
realmente preparada para el posconflicto? Eso esta fuera de la reglas, incluso nosotros
queremos hacer al final de noviembre un gran foro para poner a pensar a la gente en “en
Bogotá en el posconflicto ¿que va a pasar?” Porque ya tuvimos inconvenientes cuando
fue la inmovilización de grupos paramilitares, ¿tu estarías dispuesto a tener un vecino
como guerrillero?, ¿tu estarías dispuesto a tener una empleada de servicio que fuese
guerrillera? En Bogotá tenemos que estar dispuestos, y ese es el costo del conflicto y eso
no se ha trabajado y toca trabajar en eso, y la sociedad civil ahí donde queda, es un
sociedad civil que no esta discutiendo temas que realmente no son de tolerancia y de
respeto en construcción de ciudadanía y aquí eso si nos falta mucho, es duro y una
sociedad civil fuerte es cuando hay una conciudadana fuerte, donde se respeta derechos,
mira no mas los británicos, es una de las sociedades civiles fuertes, por ejemplo,
también esta el tema legal que los ampara. Pero aquí es muy débil el tema ciudadano, el

34

respeto por la ley es débil, entonces si aquí no hay una cultura ciudadana y un respeto
por la ley, y viene el tema de la corresponsabilidad que también lo hay la sociedad civil
sigue siendo muy débil, si porque por lo regular lo que tu encuentras es que aquí la
gente no tiene ese sentido de corresponsabilidad, no es un tema únicamente de
respuesta del estado, mira el espacio publico o mira no mas el tema de los peatones,
sencillísimo como en tema del atajo, eso afecta muchísimo al tema de la sociedad civil,
yo lo digo como mas politólogo, eso afecta muchísimo, y en otros países, eso afecta
completamente. Es muy difícil, son esos temas que para querer tener una sociedad civil
fuerte primero hay que trabajar temas de ciudadanía, y la soberanía que es no le
apuntan a eso, de pronto ECOTARI hizo un estudio en temas de eso, unas criticas sobre
las ONGs que hay en todo eso, de pronto les puedo mandar si me dan un correo y con
gusto te los mando.
Casey: no si si no, es es como el tema como se puede construir mas un sentido de
ciudadanía.
BCV: Me gustaría que fueran a corporación CORPO VISIONARIOS, es gente que a
trabajado temas de ciudadanos. Son muy buenos y les pueden preguntar y les piden
encuesta en temas social y todo.
Casey: ¿Piensas que de verdad no hay muchos, pero hay organizaciones trabajando en
este tema, y tratando de cómo…?
BCV: Pues puede haber muchos, pero están desorganizados, su nivel de incidencia es
mínimo también porque dependen también de su estado económico, su crebilidad en
medios
Casey: Y si, ya hablamos como un poquito en el contexto de la sociedad civil en el caso
de una Paz y tiene que fortalecerse mucho mas.
BCV: Yo diría que para estudiar una sociedad civil vayan a los 90 con las reformas
económicas y con todo eso
Casey: si pero no es muy bueno, hay una organización multilateral que se llama CIVICIS
que solamente, si que solamente se enfoca a esto
BCV: No lo que digo es para los 90, todo el tema de las reformas económicas y todo eso
para que vean la sociedad civil y eso, para que vean en Colombia como se dio, y hay
organizaciones que están digamos coordinadas, las grandes están bien coordinadas pero
también hay mas pequeñas, hay un directorio de ONGs. Donde las ONGs se conviertan
solamente para buscar un contrato
Maria: Tal cual, eso es lo que
BCV: si entonces cualquiera se monta una ONG y es la figura jurídica que tu tienes para
montar el contrato pero la filosofía no es de un ONG, es solamente para tener el contrato.
Maria: Y hay millones, que lo cogieron para…
BCV: Millones, cuando tu vas a hacer un censo sobre ONG, sin embargo como
localidades, no no hay que estigmatizar
Maria: No lo que digo es que, no es que no sirve para nada en el sentido de lo que
nosotros para lo que a ellos le sirvió, lo que nosotros creamos es crear ONGs y que esa
visión que tienen de para ayudar a cualquier sector de verdad lo implementen de verdad
lo hagan pero no lo tenían que hacer porque es un contrato.
BCV: No si, todo político en un país tiene una ONG o ONGs
Casey: Si pero no piensas que, ¿parte del problema es que es muy fácil crear una ONG?
BCV: Si, pero pues entonces que haces tu, ¿limitar la gente que no pueda crear una ONG?
Casey: Si no obvio, eso limita el espacio

35

BCV: Todo el mundo esta en igual de condiciones para crear su ONG, ósea la ley no te
puede decir tu no puedes crear tu empresa, tu no puedes crear tu organización
reglamentaria. El problema es que crean una ONG con una filosofía empresarial
Maria: Si pues para eso crea una empresa
BCV: Pero el problema es que eso crea unos beneficios tributarios y en fin
Casey: ¿Pero entonces como, de que manera se puede crear mas como off side de las
ONGs para ver cuales de verdad son ONG y cuales son como empresas, o no hay una
manera?
BCV: tendrían que crear como una directriz del gobierno nacional que diga esto es una
ONG, pero es difícil, porque es que hay ONG locales dependen también del ámbito de
acción
Casey: Entonces como lo hace Europa, que tiene tantas organizaciones y todas son como,
tiene alguna meta
BCV: Aquí supuestamente también es lo mismo, osea una Charity que funciona en
Europa tiene que pasar un informe al final de lo que hizo, aquí también, pero pues eso
no es un impedimento para que no se pueda montar una ONG, es difícil.
Maria: Yo creo que eso es, muchas gracias por recibirnos. Es el mejor espacio que los
ciudadanos tienen para su país y para su ciudad.
BCV: Si pero aunque mira llevamos 15 años y la gente piensa que es un programa nuevo,
otra gente piensa que este es un programa del sector publico de la alcaldía, me entiendes
no es tan fácil y mantener credibilidad.
Maria: Es lo mas importante y es lo que mejor han hecho, porque yo creo que también
es de las poquitas organizaciones, es como Bogotá Humanitaria y esta es de las que mas
se sabe y de las que mas se hable y de las que mas se cree.
BCV: Yo les sugiero que vayan a a Conexión Colombia porque tienen incidencia con
muchas ONGs, lo que lo ha hecho muy bien es Conexión Colombia muy buena cosa,
porque ellos lo que hacen es buscar un proyecto que tenga una ONG pequeña en X
pueblo y buscan un financiador con unos requerimientos. Ellos les pueden ayudar
mucho, son buenos. Listo
Casey: Muchas Gracias
CINEP 8/15/13
¿Como fue creado como se desarrollo cuales son sus funciones y metas?

36

Yo llevo un año y medio , pero les cuento, primero les muestro este libro que muestra los
40 años de CINEP, y otro de cuando CINEP cumplió 25 años y se llama “una opción
muchas búsquedas” y esos libros tiene mucha mas información de personas que llevan
desde que empezó la organización que yo no les voy a poder dar por lo que yo solo llevo
un ano y medio, pero bueno CINEP es una de las obras sociales de los jesuitas en el país,
los jesuitas tienen muchas obras en todo el país , otro ejemplo en las regiones como los
programas de desarrollo y paz, el mas famoso es el del Magdalena medio, que nació a
mediados de los noventa en pero ahora hay unas 20 obras en diferentes regiones del
país
¿Pero es gubernamental ?
Si funciona como una ONG porque todo funciona con cooperación internacional,
entonces es independiente en ese sentido pero la dirección del CINEP le responde a
una dirección mas arriba de ellos que esta conformada por jesuitas, entonces digamos el
canciller de los jesuitas lo dirige, digamos ayer estuvo el gran canciller aquí en Colombia
y estuvieron reunidos, entonces esa es la estructura entonces la dirección es de los
jesuitas , pero no tienen ningún vinculo con el gobierno son totalmente independientes.
Pero bueno continuando con la estructura, esto funciona por equipos de investigación,
entonces cada grupo tiene autonomía para buscar financiación y eso entonces digamos
no todos tienen el mismo presupuesto base para las investigaciones. Hay dos programas
grandes de investigación : programa uno es el de la construcción de paz y desarrollo y
ahí varios subgrupos esta iniciativas de paz, equipo de violencia y formación del estado,
formación otro de choco, esta un equipo de ciudanía de desarrollo y paz, este se centra
en Bogotá , escuela de fronteras , especialmente en Cúcuta y son defensoras de derechos
humanos, y el otro programa es de ciudadanía y democracia ahí esta el grupo de
movimientos sociales otro que trabaja en la sierra Nevada con indígenas, esos dos
programas son grandes y se articulan con los otros equipos.
Uno de los equipos de los mas importantes y es autónomo es el banco de datos de
derechos humanos, y ellos si tienen mas autonomía que cualquier otro equipo por lo el
trabajo que hacen y tienen banco de datos de diferentes regiones del país entonces ellos
tienen mucha información de violaciones de derechos humanos y de derecho
internacional humanitario y pues temas de violencia política, cuando no se pueden
ubicar en uno de los primeros dos , se ubica en temas de violencia política.
Ese equipo siempre esta yendo a las regiones , esa información es súper delicado , y a
veces el gobierno , por ejemplo la vice presidencia que también tiene base de datos para
que CINEP les comparta pero no se comparte , y la seguridad de esa información es
privada y secreta , la seguridad de si información es importantísima
¿Entonces la mayor función es investigación?
Si principalmente es investigación pero uno estando acá pero se da cuenta que el
trabajo de campo también es otro componente, hay equipos que publican muchos y
otros que tienen mas trabajo de campo.

37

Digamos los que trabajan en frontera trabajan en derechos humanos, hacen muchos
talleres enseñando sobre derechos humanos y formar también defensores de derechos
humanos en las regiones, los equipos de choco y en la sierra Nevada, trabajan allá con
varios procesos como con programas de desarrollo económico, ese es mas
acompañamiento ellos nos están tanto mostrando investigaciones el que mas publica
trabajos de investigación es el equipo de violencia política y formación del estado, si
buscan Fernán Gonzales tienen muchas publicaciones y tienen otro grupo que trabajan
con otros con otro centro de investigación BECOFI de otras organizaciones y publican
mucho sobre la presencia del estado , presencia del estado varia de una región a otra y
nosotros también tenemos publicaciones mas entorno a acciones colectivas por la paz y
hacemos seguimiento al proceso de dialogo y negociación.
CINEP tiene 3 estrategias : investigación , incidencia en la opinión publica, educación
popular, el equipo de Bogotá junto con el de frontera digamos , se basa mucho en la
educación popular y no solo de derechos humanos sino educación en general.
¿Y como hacen esto, como educan?
A traves de proyectos enfocados a pedagogías
¿Pero trabajaban directamente con escuela o tienen eventos?
Han hecho eventos para estrategia para educación popular pero por lo general es con
colegios en zonas muy pobres, de hecho el equipo de Bogotá ha ido articulando proyecto
en temas de participación política con el distrito, pero entonces si son varios proyectos.
Incidencia : hay un equipo de comunicación, aquí se publican dos revistas una es una
revista que se llama 100 días y esta trata sobre análisis de coyuntura ( que ha pasado en
los últimos tres meses en Colombia ) y hay otra revista que se llama Controversia , esta
es mas académica, y en esta participan otras organizaciones y pues ellos tienen comité
editorial, y discuten que temas van a salir en la revista, la revista sale semestralmente.
Están todas acá , pero no se pueden llevar, los libros si se prestan.
Otro componente importante es que el CINEP construye información, entonces los
equipos tienen base de datos y hay un sistema de información general , entonces las
bases de datos , se pueden consultar y hay un archivo de prensa que también se puede
consultar acá , este es muy interesante porque crearon un tesauros temático, entonces
hay digamos clasifican las noticias, ya sea con violencia política o organismos del estado
etc. y esto se revisa, se le pone un código según la noticia , luego las escanean y las
suben a este archivo. Entonces las personas pueden venir acá y mirar esto.
¿Cualquier persona puede venir?
Si , aquí se pude consultar todo, no se pueden llevar cosas pero consultar todo si. No hay
que estar afiliado ni nada y todo el mundo puede venir.
Bueno siguiendo , hay diferentes bases de datos, una de ellas es sobre movimientos
sociales, tienen categorías, actores, diferentes categorías para clasificar esa información

38

ya sea por marchas o bloqueos, igual el grupo de violencia política tiene base de datos ,
hay otro que se llama data paz: dentro de esta hay otras tres bases de datos 1. acciones
colectivas por la paz ( registro de movimientos y marchas que han habido y hay otras
clasificaciones dentro de esta subdivisión )2. mapa experiencias 3. seguimientos del
proceso de paz .
La credibilidad que ha ganado CINEP es por la información, por la bases de datos y el
banco de dato y sus publicaciones ,y publican en la revista noche y niebla, donde
publican violaciones a derechos humanos. Estos informes , muchas organizaciones, los
ministerios, cooperantes internacionales, ejercito son los primeros que vienen a pedir
esos informes entonces esa parte esta muy consolidada en ese sentido.
¿Como se distribuye la información?
Cuando se publica algo , en el lanzamiento a veces se reparten ahí copias y de esas
copias se envían a las regiones con los equipos o con las organizaciones que trabajaron,
otras que quedan en el CINEP para venderlas. Otras que se regalan a otras ONG y ellas
también las distribuyen con sus contactos.
¿Como crees que el CINEP llega a las personas que no conocen y no participan?
Aquí se discute eso todos los días porque un libro de investigación no llega tanto y el
equipo de comunicación han estado planteando como cuando un equipo quiere publicar
algo le pasan un formato y entonces ahí pone hacia que publico quiere dirigir la
información y ahí el equipo de comunicación sabe como cuadrar la cosa para que llegue
al publico deseado , pero no hay un indicador para medir que si se leyó lo que se publico.
Pero digamos los que trabajan en las regiones publican algo pequeño, para tratar de que
efectivamente lo lean.
¿Siempre es un texto ?
Si , pero digamos por ejemplo el 29 de julio hicimos un informe de movilización por la
paz e hicimos una presentación virtual. Se mostraron los datos de otra forma. Pero si es
una dificultad que todos los días nos preguntamos como mejorar.
(Casey: Si muchas organizaciones nos han dicho esto.)
¿Cuando tienen eventos , son abiertos al publico?
Si por lo general si , pero digamos cuando se va lanzar un libro o investigaciones se
mandan invitaciones a las personas interesadas. Y de eso se encarga el equipo de
comunicación.
¿Y tienen datos sobre cuantas personas vienen que tipo de gente viene?
Si en esos eventos siempre se pasa una lista para recolectar nombres y de donde vienen ,
yo no se eta estadística pero estas listas si existen.
¿Siendo una organización por la paz , se han preguntado sobre herramientas para que
sea mas impactante la participación de los cuidadnos?

Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries

Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (18)

Destacado

Destacado (13)

Similar a Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries

Similar a Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries (20)

Civil Society Consolidation in Bogotá: Understanding CSOs Role in Conflict Countries