Two Members of Parliament were yesterday charged with murder and sent on remand at Luzira Prisons. Ronald Reagan Okumu (Aswa), a deputy executive coordinator for the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), and Michael Nyeko Ocula (Kilak) were arrested as they walked from Parliament to the CID to make statements, on the Speaker’s advice. However, Police spokesman Assuman Mugenyi said the MPs were arrested at the CID headquarters over the February 12, 2002 murder of Alfred Bongomin, the LC3 chairman of Pabbo camp in Gulu.He said investigations were complete and that the accused would appear in court today, but the opposition MPs insisted that they had already been charged. “We have been investigating this matter. Our investigations are complete,” Mugenyi said. Okumu described the arrest and charges as political manoeuvre by the Movement to intimidate the opposition. Opposition MPs rushed to Buganda Road Court on learning of the arrest. Bugweri South MP Abdu Katuntu said, “The Movement is becoming more desperate. Their buffoonery has just started. They have been coaching an LRA returnee on what to say. We expected this and it only energises our struggle against dictatorship.” Katuntu, an FDC official, said in tramping up charges, the Government hoped to “intimidate and get opposition MPs out of circulation for one year.” “No intimidation,” he said, “will make us waiver in our fight.” Bugabula South MP Salaamu Musumba said she was saddened by the inability of the Speaker to protect MPs and by the breach of parliamentary privilege. She said members may not be arrested on their way to or from Parliament. “These guys were got from Parliament,” she said. She said the charge sheet had been amended and that the court sat after 5:00pm, past the usual working hours. “It took three minutes in court,” she said. Terego MP Kassiano Wadri said he was shocked that Okumu and Ocula were in court. “They say the crime was committed in 2002 but claim investigations are not complete and that it was committed in Gulu. Why don’t you take them to Gulu High Court? What is all this?” he said. Mugenyi said three other suspects, Steven Olanya, Alex Otim and Walter Laryang, were arrested two weeks ago over the same case and remanded in Luzira. Prior to their arrest Okumu and Ocula were required to report to the CID headquarters at 9:00am but did not. At lunchtime, Okumu said he was not aware of the summons. “The Speaker has just notified me of a letter from the CID. He apologised for not passing the letter to me,” Okumu said. He said the Speaker gave him CID chief Elizabeth Kuteesa’s telephone number. “Kuteesa insisted that the letter was in my pigeon hole. I told her there was nothing because I had just been to my pigeon hole,” he said. “It is really a shame,” she said. “This is a very disastrous development because for me my interpretation is that Acholi will die everywhere, from Kampala they die of the bad roads, in Gulu, Kony is killing them its not fair.” Mr Norbert Mao (Gulu Municipality) said, “As a matter of protest, we are going to boycott Parliament. Can you imagine the Speaker even advised Reagan to go to the police?” Mr Martin Wandera (Workers) said it was extremely regrettable though its no surprise “because this administration has demonstrated how callous it can be.” He added: “For government to behave in a manner that made some of the people go to the bush is extremely unfortunate. To use the justice system to harass the opposition is extremely unfortunate.” Walubiri who represents the duo said it was irregular that police wrote a letter through the Speaker and it (letter) was not given to the MPs in time. He said the Speaker adjourned the House prematurely without any notice. “Let me hope he was not a party to the whole thing,” Walubiri said. He said it was also irregular that the MPs reported to the CID headquarters and were immediately rushed to court, charged and remanded. “I think this is highly irregular. Ordinarily members of Parliament ought not to be subjected to this kind of process,” he said. The two MPs were planning a big demonstration to end the war in northern uganda, but the cunning regime of Yoweri museveni benefits from that war and the demo was to work against the regime. Meanwhile another 150 MPs have officially enlisted with a notorius para-military group(KAP).

People's Media:

..the soldiers who found people asleep, started raping women and schoolgirls.Some of the women were reported to have been taken out of beds then shared with their husband at gun point.."one soldier forced the muzzel of his AK47 in my anus"



When people were trying to forget this sad drama, 15 women are once abused by soldiers of the Uganda People's Defence Forces.

Kitgum Woman MP Jane Akwero told Parliament that on March 25, soldiers from the 91st battalion attacked a camp in Padibe sub-county where they beat up men, raped women and robbed them of money and property.

She read names of 18 victims including a woman (names withheld), who she said was raped by seven soldiers. The soldiers also stole sh10,000 from her.

Akwero said another woman, Betty Achola, was reportedly beaten and robbed of sh15,000.

Nsibambi said, “I am saddened by what I have heard and I have no hesitation to direct the minister of defence to investigate the matter and report back within 10 days. It is a serious matter.”

Akwero said the soldiers were from an operation in Larach hills when they went on rampage and pulled out women, some pregnant and others with their husbands, and took them on a raping spree.

She said two soldiers were arrested and the rape victims were able to identify them from the barracks.



The House burst into laughter when she said the soldiers also carried away a man wrapped in a kikooyi (cloth) thinking he was woman and beat him up when they realised he was a man.

“When the battlefield turns to be the women’s bodies, where will the women turn to?” Akwero asked.

“Many women said they were raped. Some are now being rejected by their husbands,” she said amid murmurs.

Defence minister Amama Mbabazi and his deputy Ruth Nankabirwa were not in the House at the time.



The Chief war criminal was seen last weekend thanking his fellow criminals for the dirty work they are doing and encouraged them to continue doing the same when no one is seeing..

Akwero said the following morning all soldiers of the 91st battalion were transferred to Lukwiny.
The MP said the Chairman of the Disaster Management Committee wrote, Mr Alexessius Bongomin, had written to the area Resident District Commissioner on March 26 saying, "It was quite a sad moment to the people of Padibe when our own UPDF beat, raped and forcefully took property of women, school girls and men."
Akwero said such acts were known to be committed by the Lord's Resistance Army rebels.

"For our own forces to go on rampage is disturbing and uncalled for," she said. "For some elements of the army to turn their vengeance on civilians is unfortunate."
She said she took long to report the incident because she wanted to first verify the information.

This is the first time such claims of abuses by the UPDF are being brought out in the open in Parliament.
The army has been accused by several rights groups including Amnesty International and New York based Human Rights Watch of carrying out severe human rights abuses on the civilian population in the north of the country.

The rights organisations through several reports have accused the army and other government-related military security agencies of committing multiple abuses including summary execution, torture, rape and child recruitment.

UPDF Potifolio

People's Media:

Opposition Groups

* Conseil national pour la défense de la democratie (CNDD)
* Forces armees du peuple (FAP)
* Forces nationales de liberation (FNL)
* Forces de liberation nationale (FALINA)
* Forces pour la défense de la democratie (FDD)
* Front pour la liberation nationale (FROLINA)
* Parti pour la liberation du peuple hutu (PALIPEHUTU)
* Union pour la liberation nationale (ULINA)


Burundi has been engaged in a civil war marked by ethnic violence, which includes fighting between the Tutsi-dominated army and armed Hutu rebel groups. The fighting has caused widespread civilian casualties since the killing of democratically elected president Melchior Ndadaye in October 1993.



Having determined that the situation in Burundi continued to constitute a threat to international peace and security in the region and acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Security Council, by its resolution 1545 of 21 May 2004, decided to establish the United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB) in order to support and help to implement the efforts undertaken by Burundians to restore lasting peace and bring about national reconciliation, as provided under the Arusha Agreement.








POSITIVE SOLIDARITY

Uganda criminal regime needs at least 3,000 hotel rooms of international standard, 60 presidential suites and about sh90b to host the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in 2007, Commonwealth Secretariat officials have said. 3,000 hotel rooms are required for the visitors including the Queen of England, 53 heads of state and government, foreign affairs ministers, business, youth and women forums and leaders of civil SOCIETY organisations. Media representatives will need 1,500 rooms.The queen is expected to stay at State House Entebbe, which is now under renovation.

How can the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in 2007 take priority of ugandans when Over 1.2 million people live in camps, the life is horrible. The people are not living, they are existing. They are next to dead. Life in the camps is one of abject poverty. Food is short, and many infants suffer from malnutrition. Water is scarce since camps often do not have enough boreholes. There is little access to health care. In some camps there are schools, but not enough teachers. Moreover, school life is constantly disrupted by the insecurity.

In both Kitgum and Gulu, some people begin as night commuters and end up staying on in town. According to sources at the St Joseph's Mission Hospital, 450 former commuters no longer return to their homes each morning. Instead, they camp under a huge mango tree outside the mission gates. Early in the morning, men and women go to look for work as casual labourers around Kitgum town. They return in the mid-afternoon, prepare their only meal of the day, and then retire inside the mission for the night.

They children have a lot of difficulties with schooling. They can't learn well, they are traumatised, they can't sleep well, but they force themselves to study. Women are afraid to sleep in their homes, not only because of rebels but also because they fear they might be raped by army officers. They don't care if you are young or old. Rape is very common in northern Uganda. If you report a rape, they just transfer the soldier.



UPDF lawyer charged

A UPDF lawyer who has been representing suspects including senior army officers facing ghost soldier charges at the General Military Court martial, has been charged with aggravated robbery.

Sgt. Moses Mugerwa Lukwago appeared yesterday before the court martial chaired by Lt. Gen. Elly Tumwine, together with two other suspects who allegedly helped him carry out the robbery of sh2.5m from a catholic priest.

Mugerwa said the allegations were created by some envious people.
Tumwine remanded the lawyer in Makindye military police headquarters, while the other two suspects, Lawrence Kayiira and Dick Lutalo, were remanded in Kigo Prison.

They will return to the court on April 30. Mugerwa, who was arrested last week, was assigned by the army to represent suspects without money to hire private lawyers and those arrested by Operation Wembley.

He has also represented former chief of staff Brig. Nakibus Lakara and other senior army officers facing charges of creating ghost soldiers on the army payroll

People's Media:



"Those in authority fear the mask for their power partly resides in identifying, stamping and cataloguing: in knowing who you are...our masks are not to conceal our identity but to reveal it...Today we shall give this resistance a face; for by putting on our masks we reveal our unity; and by raising our voices in the street together, we speak our anger at the facelessness of power..."




The Zapatistas are not the first 'radicals' to mask up in black as historians will be quick to point out. The tradition of masking up for political struggle can be traced to Autonomists who operated in Europe over 20 years ago. The first so-called autonomists were those individuals involved in the Italian Autonomia movement that got its start during the Hot Autumn of 1969, a time of intense social unrest. Throughout the 1970s in Italy a widespread movement for total social change was initiated by autonomous groups of factory workers, women and students.




Masking- up was brought back to international attention with the Zapatista uprising and with the participation Black Bloc anarchists in anti-globalisation protests. The Zapatistas have a strong support base within the anarchist community in general, many are attracted to the Zapatistas organising in non-hierachial ways, and the Zapatistas struggle for indigenous autonomy without seeking state power. The similarity of the Zapatista dress code and Black Bloc anarchists is of course obvious. Ski-masks, or any sort of black mask. Recently Black Bloc anarchists have emulated the charasmatic imagery and rhetoric of Zapatism. Some have even used this to help recruit a 'few good anarchists' for Black Bloc demonstrations.




A black bloc is a collection of anarchists and anarchist affinity groups that get together for a particular protest action.The flavor of the black bloc changes from action to action, but the main goals are to provide solidarity in the face of a repressive police state and to convey an anarchist critique of whatever is being protested that day.There are many reasons for the masks, beyond the media attention black masks get. The main one is the recognition that the police videotape activists and keep files on them. Masks also promote anonymity and egalitarianism.



They also protect the identities of those who want to engage in illegal acts and escape to fight another day!There have been critisim of Black Bloc protest because of perceived violence. But Black Bloc advocates have responded by saying "We contend that property destruction is not a violent activity unless it destroys lives or causes pain in the process. By this definition, private property--especially corporate private property--is itself infinitely more violent than any action taken against it."




Black Bloc critics point to the seemingly randomness of Black Bloc targets, but if one looks closer, the targets global corporates like McDonalds or banks, in the case of Seattle, activists outlined why certain corporates were targeted for Black Bloc 'redesigning'.




"No justice, no peace, fuck the police!"

"America's infamous Black Bloc were once again out in force in the streets of the nation's capitol today, April 16.
A posse of around two hundred masked-up teenage ninja revolutionaries marched on the IMF and World Bank at around 7am under a sea of black and red flags and a twenty foot banner declaring them the "Revolutionary Anti Capitalist Bloc." They then set about on a running, wall tagging, barricade building, cop baiting rampage. 'Fuck the Whorehouse' appeared on a Whitehouse outbuilding wall, The World Bank's door plaque now boasts a natty anarchy sign and a federal spook's motor lost a couple of windows."



Black Bloc groups have been present in protests in Melbourne, Prague, Davos, Nice, London, Seattle, Washington and no doubt they will appear in uganda.

Black bloc has no problem with civilian protesters and strongly maintains solidarity!!

People's Media and Agency:





Dictator Yoweri Museveni is busy playing peace-maker in africa-sending peace troops to Somalia, Sudan and also decieving the international community that everything is okey and they should come and invest in uganda. Oh dear, dear! How can you invest in a country that uses a Nazi social program against 4 million of its own defenceless population?

The international community and politicians in uganda should be ashamed of themselves for just seating in their air-conditioned offices doing nothing on the suffering of an entire people. We are calling upon all descent people to take to the streets of uganda in solidarity with the people of northern uganda! We are very convienced that foreign refugees in other camps are being looked after better than our own brothers and sisters in museveni's concentration camps. FDC, UPC, DP, etc. Forget about anti- 3rd term demos, think of the children, women, men and the future generation of Northern uganda!!


"Anne Richard, the IRC's vice president of government relations and advocacy, briefed the Human Rights Caucus of the House of Representatives Thursday on the toll the war between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Ugandan government is taking on the civilian population in northern Uganda.

Richard told the representatives that the number of Ugandans displaced from their homes has almost tripled in the last two years, to about 1.4 million. Human rights abuses—including forced abduction, murder, rape, and the use of children as combatants by both sides—are pervasive.


Richard cited an urgent need to facilitate a peaceful resolution to the conflict, provide protection for civilians, and ensure that significant funding is available for humanitarian programs. She quoted an IRC colleague who said the situation in northern Uganda is worse than Darfur, where the ongoing humanitarian crisis has received far more public attention and international aid, and offered several recommendations:"



ANOTHER DARFUR?

U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland compared the situation to the well-publicised problems in Sudan's Darfur region.
"If they go out (of camps), they are killed as much, or raped as much or worse as in Darfur, by the Lord's Resistance Army and others," Egeland said in a recent statement.




Museveni has rejected the comparison, but that hasn’t stopped aid workers continuing to make it.


“One hundred percent of the population is affected by this kind of crisis -- it’s huge,” Gael Griette, an expert covering Uganda for the European Commission's Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO), told AlertNet.

Griette said that the entire rural population of Acholiland was in displacement camps.

“People have been cut off from their livelihoods, cut off from everything. They are in camps with nothing, and insecurity is very high,” he said.

“In terms of magnitude and acuteness we can compare what is going on in Northern Uganda to Darfur.

“What is very different between the two crises is the way it is addressed in terms of funding, humanitarian agencies being present in the field, and on top of all it is very different in the way it is being covered in the media.”

Griette said one of the reasons northern Uganda did not get much media coverage was because the LRA had been terrorising the local population for so long that the crisis was seen as old news.



“But this is short-sighted because the crisis has tripled in terms of the number of people affected and multiplied by five or six in terms of acuteness in the past two years -- more or less the same time as the Darfur crisis,” he said.

"Perhaps one approach is to build on growing interest among US officials, media and public in Sudan and the Darfur crisis and try to adopt a broader, regional perspective,” Richard said. “We should consider how to help people on both sides of the Sudan/Uganda border. Without a doubt, though, the key is greater U.S. support for peace and protection programs."
Profile of those involved in this tragedy

Daniel Burton, a.k.a. Melchizedek, Lord of the Brambles

Anarcho-capitalism is a type of individualist anarchism, but most people who are Anarcho-capitalists don't identify primarily with individualist anarchism, and most people who explicitly identify themselves as individualist anarchists consider themselves class war anarchists, or anti-capitalists.  There are some inbetweens too...

But the principal difference between anarcho-capitalism and individualist anarchism is that anarcho-capitalists typically come from a philosophical background that values capitalism primarily as a value in and of itself, while individualist anarchists have a more egalitarian view of individualism, with no such allegiance to capitalism, and much less faith that the free markets will serve the social good on its own without some kind of limitation or constraints.

One of the key differences is that individualist anarchists have traditionally opposed the unlimited ownership of land, especially absentee ownership, for the purpose of passively collecting rent.  In the 19th Century, the main idea was some kind of squatter sovereignty, in which individuals only had a right to land while they were using it. Any unused land was free for someone else to claim.  That made a lot of sense in the frontier-type situation of 19th Century America.  Today, there is a lot more complex and innovative though to deal with space constraints and environmental issues.  People like Fred Foldvary have ideas on this like everybody paying a land rent, divided among the rest of the community, and people paying an extraction fee for the use of natural resources.

I personally see problems with both ideas, and think the focus should be more on the kind of process and social institutions to achieve these goals than the final outcome or set of rights itself.  I would like to see land use decisions made more flexibly, in a way that responds to peoples' needs, by some sort of informal bargaining process between all the various parties, not by any set system of voting, but not by any set system of property ownership or individual use rights either, something like the kind of anarchistic communalism that social anarchists want more generally -- something like a bunch of sovereign monarchs negotiating for a peace treaty basically, more like this than a parliament or a bunch of property owners taking each other to court.

Another difference, historically, has been attitudes towards intellectual property.  Many individualist anarchists have opposed anything like copyrights or patents, not only based on principles of freedom of speech, but also for economic reasons.  Like social anarchists, they see patents and copyrights as a limitation on the rights of the poor and working class to be self-sufficient and to build alternative economic systems, autonomous in and of themselves.  They see access to not only land, but also technology, as being crucial to these goals.  This is also crucial as an international issue.  Europe, it its development took technological ideas from many other parts of the World without compensation, and would not have been able to get to where it is today without doing so -- so why should we now demand that Third World countries live up to a standard that Europeans themselves never had to?

Perhaps not a substantive difference in ultimate goals, but a difference in emphasis and strategies is individualist anarchists' view of the importance of ending the government money monopoly and regulations on banking.  In a world where nobody had to pay taxes in the government's currency and there was no legal tender, individualist anarchists think that those who are presently without significant financial resources could improve their lot by joining mutual banks and issuing private, alternative currencies.  They could thus gain a medium of exchange to do business with each other, without having to borrow from or pay interest to a passive class of wealthy individuals.  Some, like mutualist anarchists, see the possibility of the working class issuing currency backed by their homes, cars, etc., just as banks back their deposits by loans to homeowners, for cars, etc. now.  Others imagine currency backed by the power labor itself, by promises to work if it is redeemed, etc. In any case, all, including anarcho-capitalists see interest rates going down far lower and money becoming more readily available without a free market for currency.

Anarcho-capitalists, however, do not typically place such high importance on alternative currencies or share individualist anarchists' concern for the good of the poor and working class, so in reality, this leads to a difference in present strategies.  Some anarcho-capitalists fight endlessly for tax cuts that would mostly benefit the rich without ever thinking of how alternative currencies could help the poor. Individualist anarchists, who consider themselves part of the left, would never seek such things first, when the poor are so much more in need of individual rights that could improve their lives.

Some individualist anarchists would go even farther.  Benjamin Tucker, a 19th Century individualist anarchist, and perhaps the most famous individualist anarchist of all, at one point, thought that not only ownership of land, but also all rent, business profits, and interest were wrong, and their victims should never be compelled to pay any of these, unless it was their choosing.  He even thought that workers, renters, and lendees, who had once voluntarily agreed to respect these capitalist institutions, should later be able to go back and seek compensation for the wrongs done to them.

Today, with more developed economic theory, this doesn't seem to make so much sense -- if you prohibit all rent, profit, and interest, what will most likely happen is nobody will rent, lend, or make capital investments, and the poor will simply not be able to obtain housing, money, or physical capital to work with...  But modern economic theory also postulates that capitalism doesn't always work perfectly on its own, and individualist anarchists who don't share a capitalist ideology, might use these ideas to try to formulate individualist responses to market failures.  For example, monopolies that engage in price gouging are not particularly nice.  We could have government protect us from this, but it is not likely to do a particularly good job, and the extra bureaucracy necessary to carry out this function can also be used to carry out functions of oppression.  So what is the individualist response?  Well, we could have individuals, and their chosen protection organizations, go to these monopolies and force them to recognize an individual right to buy products at a reasonable price...  And these would more than likely be less bureaucratic and more efficient than government regulation.  There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is competition in the market for enforcement.

There are some other things I would like to see recognized, like the need not just to allow use of natural resource in a more equitable way, but the need also to preserve them, especially things that are not so much commodities like intact ecosystems.  There is a kind of market failure at work here too.  You could on the one hand, say that if people want ecosystems preserved, they should pay for them.  The problem is that this creates a moral hazard, rent seeking behavior, basically, a perverse incentive for people who would not normally have any interest in destroying the environment for their own purposes to threaten to do so just so they can collect some money to preserve it.  You could assign the rights just the opposite way, and say everyone owns the environment, so you have to get permission from everyone before destroying anything. This would cause instead another kind of market failure, a hold-out problem.  Anyone who wanted to make some kind of development with an environmental impact would start trying to pay off people to do so.  The problem is some people would start pretending to be far more interested in the preservation of even minor, inconsequential environmental assets than they really were, just to get paid off, and the fewer people who were left, the more they would demand.  The end result would be that you could never do anything because you couldn't pay everyone off.

The best kind of solution to this problem is something in between, where you can do some things that destroy the environment without anybody's permission, but you still have to pay people in the community (or even world at large) to compensate for the damage -- and they have to accept some set price without being able to stop you and hold out for more.

The best way to do this, I think, is not through some moral abstraction that says we all should respect this set of rights, and insist on that amount of payment, but a dynamic process of negotiation like I described earlier.  Each individual who wants to live in a world whose ecosystems are preserved should negotiate would each individual who wants to do something withecological impact.  Their respective strengths of conviction will form the balance that sets exactly what the price is, or in some cases, whether any price is enough.  The fallback if negotiations fail will be direct action -- either the developer goes ahead and starts building, using force to defend this right if necessary, or the environmentalists undertake activity to stop him, using force if necessary.  The incentive to stop negotiations from breaking down, and this happening, is that such conflicts are messy, and often mutually destructive and costly to both parties.  Once people learn this, they should solve their disputes peacefully most of the time.

To work effectively, the environmentalists would probably have to group together into organizations that represent the interests of their members, but since this is an individualist solution I'm talking about, you can imagine that each individual would have the choice to join or not join many different organizations, and different environmental organizations that worked in parallel to enforce the individual rights to protect the ecosystem would compete with each other.  Imagine a world where Earth First!, the Sierra Club, and the Wilderness society sit down at a bargaining table with a developer and 20 smaller environmental organizations, some representing coalition of yet smaller organizations, represent the interests of their members, and negotiate a resolution where the developer either agrees to pay everyone off to compensate for the environmental destruction, or leaves and abandons the projects, because he can't afford the price.  Now that definitely isn't capitalism -- but it is individualist.

You can imagine that in an individualist anarchy, individual rights might supersede property rights in all sorts of other ways, without economic resources having to be collectivized -- and some of these like squatter's rights are definitively individual rights.  There is a lot of innovation possible in thinking up various different ways of dealing with things, various different balances in a scheme of individual rights between property rights, equality, and environmentalism.  Not a lot has been said about this is in recent years; a lot more needs to be said.

People's Media:





The purpose of this supplement is to make available to the national and international community the necessary information about the Colombian reality in general and in particular the reality of the FARC-EP Fuerzes Armadas Revolutionarias de Colombia

It is true that the FARC-EP are not specifically a signatory of all international human rights; however, this supplement demonstrates that the FARC-EP's rules are adjusted to it, as we are a revolutionary movement that has humanitarianism as one of its logical pillars.

Title I: THE SCOPE OF THE PRESENT PROTOCOL
ARTICLE I THE SCOPE OF MATERIAL APPLICATION

1. The present Protocol, which develops and completes article 3, common to the Geneva Conventions of 12th August 1949, without modifying its current conditions of application, will be applied to all armed conflicts that are not covered by article 1 of the Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of the 12th of August 1949, which concerns the protection of the victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol 1) which develop in the territory of a high contractual party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which under a responsible command, exert control over a part of that territory such that allows them to carry out sustained and concentrated military operations therefore apply the present Protocol.

2. The present Protocol shall not be applied in situations of internal tensions or disturbances. Such as mutinies, sporadic and isolated acts of violence and other acts that are not armed conflicts.

The FARC-EP developed their war of resistance in an uninterrupted manner since 27 May 1964, when 48 patriots 46 men and 2 women took up arms in the municipality of Marquetalia (Tolima) against the aggression of the establishment, which the different governments have continued. The FARC-EP are now exercising the people's legitimate right of rebellion and self-determination. They struggle for the construction of a new Colombia, without exploited or exploiters, in peace, with dignity and sovereignty and for the fundamental rights of the majority of Colombians.

Historically, the FARC-EP have been the people's army and have consolidated as a military-political organization, which is made up of sixty fronts that are present on all over the entire national territory. It also has urban structures in the cities, which are organized into seven blocks of fronts.

All the activity of the FARC-EP is regulated by:
a) The Statute
b) The regulations of the disciplinary regime
c) The internal rules of command

· The Statute formulates the ideological foundations of the FARC-EP; it defines its organic structure, the regime of command, the obligations and rights of the combatants and the basic principles of the revolutionary organization.

· The Regulations of the Disciplinary Regime deals with essential matters of military order.

· The Internal Rules of Command deals with the usual daily practices of the different units of the FARC-EP.

· The Eighth National Guerrilla Conference of the FARC-EP, held in April 1993, introduced and updated the provisions of the Statute, Regulations and Rules. These will apply until a new Conference is undertaken.

· The National Guerrilla Conference is the highest level of authority in the FARC-EP, Therefore it defines the politics of the organization.

· The Statutes define the organic and hierarchical structure of the FARC-EP. As an example we quote parts of article 3 of chapter II and chapter III.

Chapter II

Article 3: The structure of the FARC-EP corresponds to the following order:
a) Squad: the basic unit consisting of 12 combatants.
b) Guerilla: consists of two squads.
c) Compañía (Company): consists of two guerrillas.
d) Column: consists of two or more companies.
e) Front: consists of more than one column.
f) The Central High Command (Estado Mayor Central) designates the highest command of each front.
g) Block of Fronts: consists of five or more fronts. It co-ordinates and unifies the activity of the fronts in a specific zone of the country.
h) The Central High Command or its secretariat designates the High Command of each Block. They co-ordinate the areas of the respective blocks.
i) The Central High Command (Estado Mayor Central) is the superior organism of direction and command of the FARC-EP. Its agreements, orders and decisions rule over the entire movements and all its members.

CHAPTER II
REGIME OF COMMAND

Article 4. The hierarchical structure of the FARC-EP, is as follows:

a) Squad deputy
b) Commander (12h)
c) Guerrilla Deputy
d) Commander of the Guerilla
e) Company Deputy
f) Company Commander
g) Column Deputy
h) Column Commander
i) Front Deputy
j) Front Commander
k) Block Deputy
l) Block Commander
m) Central High Command Deputy
n) Commander in Chief of the Central High Command

The following are collegiate organisms of direction and command:
The Central High Command, the High Commands of Blocks and Fronts and the Commanders of Columns, Guerrilla and Squads.

The organisms of direction previously mentioned are ruled by the principle of collective order.

Article 5

For each responsibility in the command the correspondent badge is created and controlled by the Mayor Central Command.

The prerequisites to be a commander according to article 6 of the Statute are the following:

g) To possess revolutionary courage and high moral values and to be endowed with exemplary honesty.
h) To respect the interests of the civilian population, to behave correctly with them and to earn their trust.

The National Command of the FARC-EP, elected in the National Guerrilla Conference, is the Central High Command, of which the National Secretariat is part. This is composed of seven members; among them, its maximum authority and Commander in Chief Manuel Marulanda Velez. The other six members are the Commanders Raúl Reyes, Alfonso Cano, Timoleón Jimenez, Iván Marquez, Jorge Briseño and Efraín Guzmán.

For a better understanding of the ranks in the FARC-EP, we reproduce below a table that compares the ranks in the FARC-EP with those of traditional armies.

TRADITIONAL ARMY
FARC-EP

Sub official
Candidate for Commander
Corporal second class
Squad Deputy
Corporal first class
Squad Commander
Sargent second class
Guerilla Deputy
Sargent first class
Guerilla Commander
Sargent Major
Company Deputy
Sub lieutenant
Company Commander
Lieutenant
Column Deputy
Captain
Column Commander
Major
Front Deputy
Lieutenant Colonel
Front Commander
Colonel
Block Deputy
Brigadier General
Block Commander
General Major
Central High Commander Deputy
Three star General
Commander of the Central High Command
Commander in Chief of the Central High Command

The Belligerent Character of the FARC-EP

In addition to the previous elements, there is an explicit and de facto recognition of the belligerent character of the FARC-EP; as there have been conversations and meetings since the 1980s and accords have been signed. Furthermore at the international level there are political and diplomatic relations with different governments with different political parties, international governmental organisms, non-governmental agencies and prominent individuals. In the history of the FARC-EP there have been different encounters and meetings in an attempt to find a political solution to the conflict that the Colombian people suffers. Amongst these we highlight the following:

1984- The signing of the accords for a cease-fire, truce and peace, also known as La Uribe accords between the Colombian Government (Belisario Betancur and the FARC-EP).
1986-90 Multiple meetings between representatives of the Virgilio Barco/ Cesar Gaviria Governments and the National Secretariat of the FARC-EP.
1991- Talks between the Government (Cesar Gaviria) and the insurgent armed forces that make up the Simon Bolivar Guerilla Coordination (Coordinora Guerillera Simon Bolivar - CGSB) in Caracas, Venezuela.
1992- Another round of talks between the Government (Cesar Gaviria) and the Simon Bolivar Coordinator in Tlaxacala, Mexico.
1998- The President elect Andres Pastrana visits the FARC-EP camps and interview with Commander in Chief Manuel Marulanda Velez.
1998- Members of the National Secretariat of the FARC-EP meet with a governmental delegation.
1999, 7th of January- The instalation of public peace talks in San Vicente del Caguan, Caqueta one of the five municipalities demilitarized by the Government as a condition demanded by the FARC-EP for the peace talks. These talks where attended by national and international guests, representatives of the powers of the state and the accredited diplomatic body of Colombia.

PROTOCOL I. ADDITIONAL TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS OF 12 AUGUST 1949, RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICTS. (PROTOCOL I).

SECTION 2 STATUTE OF COMBATENTS AND PRISIONERS OF WAR.
Article 43, Armed Forces.
The armed forces of one side of the conflict are made up of all the armed and organized forces, groups and units that are placed under one command, which is responsible for the conduct of its subordinates, even when this side is represented by a government or an authority that is not recognized by the adverse side of the conflict. Such armed forces must be submitted to a regime of internal discipline that requires compliance, amongst others, to the rules of International Law applicable in armed conflicts. As previously stated the activities of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia - People's Army (FARC-EP) are regulated by:
a) The Statute
b) The Regulations of the Disciplinary Regime
c) The Internal Rules of the Command

The revolutionary morality, ethical and principals that bind every member without exception or distinction guide all the rules contemplated in the fundamental documents of our organization. We are integrally part of the people; we are the people's revolutionary army, the reason for our struggle is the solution to the problems of all the Colombian people; for that reason it is not part of our politics to damage the interests and rights of the people. As an example of this we quote these articles from our regulations.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia - The People's Army, as the most elevated expression of revolutionary struggle for national liberation, are a military - political movement which develops its action in the ideological, political, organizational, propagandistic and in battalions of guerilla fighters. These conform the tactic of combining all these forms of struggle of the masses to gain power for the people. The discipline of the FARC-EP is political-military and under the direct orders of the Central High Command (Estado Mayor Central) which is the superior organism in the chain of command. Their agreements, orders and decisions rule over all of the movement and all it's members. All the material that is approved by the National Conference and the Central High Command are obligatory for all of the FARC-EP. The initiation into the FARC-EP is an act of conscience, voluntary, personal and between the ages of 15 to 30 years.

Duties of the FARC-EP

· Defend the interests and goods of the movement, the political organization and the masses.
· Respect prisoners of war, their physical integrity and convictions.

Actions that are penalized

· Utilizing guerilla columns against the masses
· Gossiping and spreading false information. Derogatory nicknames and the use of threats against particular persons.
· Disrespect of the masses by members of the movement.
· The murder of civilian men or women
· Sexual assault
· Theft from the civilian population
· Fraudulent or advantageous transactions with the masses.
· The consumption of drugs
· Any activity, which goes against the revolutionary morality, the healthy customs or that lowers the opinion of the FARC-EP before the masses.
· Any activity that impedes religious practices by the people.

The political line that the FARC-EP takes when developing work with the civilian population is regulated in the following manner:
A. In our fundamental objective of taking power, we must win over the hearts and minds of the people. For that reason all our military, political, organizational and propaganda actions should be directed so that the masses of the country and the city feel that we struggle to defend and represent their intereses, needs and ideas.

B. In our work of organization, agitation, political propaganda and military action, it is very important that the people understand why we develop each of our activities. Our open struggle as much as our conspirative struggle should be understood by the masses as being their struggle. The FARC-EP is an armed part of the masses.

C. Our organization and arms should always be at the service of the people so that we are seen as the their army. It is very important to always be transmitting our politics to the masses, so that they are conscious of it and therefore can participate in the struggle.

D. The work with the masses should always be directed towards consciousness-raising and recruitment to an organization involved in the struggle. Either in a Union, a group of collectives, the Bolivarian Milicia, the centers of solidarity, the guerilla etc.
E. We should dedicate special attention to community leaders that lead their community in the daily struggle; we will always make a special effort to attract them to our struggle.

F. We should always reflect our humility and we should always be prepared to give the best of ourselves for the desires and aspirations of the people.

G. Always remember not to give orders to the civilian population. We will win over their hearts and minds so that they may join the struggle.
H. The Conference underlines that we must not procrastinate in the work of constructing clandestine political organizations as the necessary tool to reach the objective that we set.

A clear example of the FARC-EP's concern for the civilian population is this communiqué that was reproduced by the international commission on the 8th of July 1998. It contains recommendations so the civilian population do not suffer the consequences deriving from the armed conflict.

To the civilian population

The FARC-EP does not use the technical terms of International Human Rights. However in a few of our documents there are rules established that aim to protect the civilian population from the conflict. These establish criteria that coincide with basic principles of human rights, such as the distinction between combatants and non-combatants and the immunity of the civilian population.

Recommendations to the Colombian civilian population

1) The civilian population should avoid having military garrisons or police stations near their houses or in areas that are densely populated.
2) The civilian population should avoid letting police use their personal cars or public transport. If the proprietor or driver is obliged to, it is preferable that they get out and hand over the keys, leave the car in the responsibility of the army and get a signed piece of paper that shows just that.
3) The civilian population should not board military vehicles of any type.
4) Civilian vehicles should maintain a distance of at least 500 meters from military vehicles or convoys on Freeways.
5) The civilian population should abstain from guiding soldiers in rural areas.
6) The civilian population should abstain from entering military garrisons or police stations and they should not sleep in them.
7) In areas of conflict, vehicles belonging to the press or humanitarian organizations should always have stickers or signs visibly indicating their organization. They should also travel at slow speeds.

One of the accords signed by the Simon Bolivar Coordinator in the first meeting of commanders Jacobe Arenas was:

STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOUR WITH THE MASSES

We are convinced that in front of our people we should behave and act like revolutionaries, like new men and women, with humility and in this manner contribute to their incorporation into the struggle. The commanders of the Simon Bolivar Guerilla Coordinator have come together in their first summit Jacobe Arenas, to call upon the Bolivarian combatants to comply to the following rules of behavior before the masses.
1) Our daily behavior and our plans, which we strictly follow, must come from the interests of the people.
2) We must respect the ideas, political, philosophical, and religious attitudes of the population and particularly the culture and autonomy of the indigenous and other minority ethnic groups.
3) We should not impede the right to vote or oblige the people to vote.
4) In the daily development and displacement of our political-military work, the security of the workers, their homes and wellbeing has to be taken into account.
5) We must respect the different methods that our collaborators use to maintain their secrecy when relating to us.
6) Our internal discipline and our work within the masses privilege the use of caution with the innocent or with friends, so that they are not left to the mercy of the terrorism and hate of the official army and their paramilitaries.
7) Everywhere where the masses are attacked by the official army and paramilitary by bombardment or destruction of their goods, we must be active in denouncing and combating these terrorist acts, so the people feel supported by us.
8) Murder or any kind of insult that is proved to be committed against the civilian population is considered to be a crime.
9) On our behalf there must be no impositions on the masses. We must endeavor that our arms are seen as their arms.
10) Claims of aggression made by the combatants against the community or other persons must be exhaustively investigated, taking into account the viewpoint of the community.
11) The commanders and the combatants must study and practice the rules of International Humanitarian Rights relevant to the conditions of our revolutionary war.
12) Should it be necessary to detain someone, to check or verify absence, being that this person is a militant or sympathizer from a sister organization, or if possible the person should be handed over.
13) In cases our fundamental principle is the respect of the right to live.
14) The commanders and the combatants must keep in mind that execution can only be carried out for the gravest of crimes committed by enemies of the people and with explicit authorization in each case by request of the superior in each organization. In every case there has to be a confrontation of the proof and the decision must be decided collectively, the commander must act in a manner consistent to the proof.
15) Alcoholism, drug addiction, theft and dishonesty are antirevolutionary vices, which damage the trust of our people.
16) We must not abuse the trust and generosity of the people and we must never ask for goods for our personal benefit.

International law for War, part of International Civil Law decides how to classify each armed conflict, which also applies these laws to civil wars and internal conflicts within a country. The war in Colombia is a typical case. These laws were put together and the terminology was regulated and sanctioned by the Geneva Conventions of August 1949 and by the first and second additional Protocols of June 1977, all of these signed and ratified by Colombia. It is these additional Protocols that make explicit reference to the rules for regulation of civil wars and armed conflicts, individually addressing insurgent forces who having taken part of the national territory from the control of the government have become subjects of International Law. The conditions that are decided by the Geneva Conventions, in particular for the additional protocol I, to consider "Legitimate Combatants" as those that are incorporated in politically insurgent armed forces are the following: a) That they wear a uniform that is recognized by the enemy. b) That they openly carry their arms. c) That they are dependent upon a responsible command. d) That they respect the laws and customs of war. Taking into account these rules we must consider all the effects of the law, on the militants of the FARC-EP as "legitimate combatants" of an insurgent force, existing and recognized by the law of the Colombian State. On the basis of President Andres Pastrana, representing the National Government, exercising his constitutional and legal powers in particular those provided by the Act 148 of 1997, issued the resolution concerning the dialogue.

The resolutions of dialogue

First resolution

It is recognized that there are members who represent the FARC-EP and for that reason we can declare the initiation of a peace process, recognizing the political character of an armed organization and their peaceful signals.

The national government in exercising their constitutional and legal attributes, especially law 148 of 1997 considers the following:

1) That the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP) has expressed their proposals and willingness for peace.

2) That the national government attending to the willingness for peace, expressed by the Colombian people in the ballet box on the 26th of October 1997 in the "Mandate for Peace, Life and Freedom", has initiated conversations with the previously mentioned insurgent organization with the goal of peacefully resolving the armed conflict.

3) That the government and the members representing the FARC remember to initiate the dialogue process inside the first 3 months of the new government, these would take place in a peaceful zone understood to be between, Mesetas, La Uribe, La Macarena, Vistahermosa and San Vicente del Caguan municipalities. There has also been a resolution to:
First Article
To declare open the process of dialogue with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP).
Second Article
To recognize the political character of the organization previously mentioned.
Third Article
To establish a peaceful zone in the municipalities of Mesetas, La Uribe, La Macarena, Vistahermosa. These are municipalities in the department of Caqueta.
This should be done during ninety days from 7th November 1998 until 7th February 1999 with the purpose of carrying out the dialogue already mentioned.

Fourth Article
The present resolution will apply from the date of its dispatch.
Communicated and fulfilled. Given in Bogota on the 14th of October 1998. Signs the president of the Republic, Andres Pastrana and the Minister of the interior, Nestor Humberto Martinez.

Second Resolution
Whereby some people are recognized as representative members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP), the National Government in practice of its constitutional and legal attributes, especially referring to the law 148 of 1997 considers the following: According to the second paragraph of the eighth article from law 148 of the 26th December 1997, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) has designated Mr. Raul Reyes, Mr. Fabian Ramerez, and Mr. Milton de Jesus Daniel as representative members of the organization previously mentioned to participate in the dialogues, negotiations or subscription of accords with the National Government or its delegates. The following are resolved:
First Article

To recognize Mr. Raul Reyes, Mr. Fabian Ramerez, and Mr. Milton De Jesus Daniel as representative members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), in the dialogue process, negotiations or accords that this organization initiates with the Government. The present resolution will apply from the date of its dispatch. Communicated and fulfilled. Given in Bogota on the 14th of December 1998. Signs the President of the Republic, Andres Pastrana, and the Minister of the Interior, Nestor Humberto Martinez.

5. In the presence of an existent belligerent relation, which recognizes that "accords between belligerent forces" is possible, based on the international law, which was signed and ratified by Colombia. Among all of the possible accords (the fulfillment of truces, the creation of peaceful, healthy and secure zones, the protection, attention and evacuation of the injured and the sick etc.). Today it seems particularly important, the prerequisite for progress to be the exchange of prisoners as is covered by article 44 of Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1977, which does not discriminate between legitimate combatants. The FARC-EP has as a compulsory rule to respect life, to provide medical assistance, food and humanitarian treatment of prisoners of war that are captured in battle.

These principles have always been present. Since the first prisoners that where captured in this war, the rule that predominated was the good treatment and quick hand over to the civil, ecclesiastical authorities or to persons of a recognized moral authority in the nation. This has been carried out on several occasions. This custom matured as the national conflict took on a greater scope, making the FARC-EP strictly respect their rules and ethical principles in regard to detaining soldiers or policemen as prisoners in insurgent camps, where their rights are strictly respected. An example of this situation, is the taking of the military base in Las Delicias, Putumayo. The product of this action was that 60 soldiers where taken as prisoners by the Column Arturo Medina from the Southern Block. From the first moment that these soldiers where under our control our revolutionary rules obliged us to: 1) Return these prisoners safe and sound to their homes.

2) Give them a humane, respectful treatment that logically includes the necessary medical attention.
We proceeded with the confirmation that a commission that had a national and international presence was welcomed by organizations, governments and personalities that were asked for their participation, to process before the Colombian Government the necessary guaranties for the return of such prisoners. At last after almost a year the Colombian Government of Ernesto Samper (1994-1998) agreed to create the secure conditions necessary for the return of the 60 prisoners of war captured in Las Delicias, Putumayo and ten that where captured in Jurado, Choco.
Indeed this experience demonstrates before the national and international opinion that the FARC-EP fall between the parameters recognized by the protocols of Geneva.

Numerous delegates of the national and international community, diplomats, as well as representatives of international media corporations that were present for the return of the soldiers carried out in Cartagena del Chaira, on the 15th of June 1997.

Due to acute crisis and the development of the war and the expertise of the FARC-EP's military action, the FARC-EP has more than four hundred members of the official Armed Forces and the National Police as prisoners of war and under guerilla control. Which according to the rules and principles already mentioned guarantees their life as well as their moral and physical integrity. At the same time hundreds of guerilla fighters are in state cells along with thousands of political prisoners that where involved in social struggles and who's political status is not recognized. As it has been continuously proved by specialized organisms, the human rights of these prisoners are not respected.

Based on this reality and according to the international legislation as well as the Geneva Conventions and its protocols, we propose to the three powers of the Colombian State; Executive, legislative and judicial, to pass a permanent legislation that allows prisoner exchange.

In this way the FARC-EP wishes to put an end to the difficult situation in which these compatriots and their families find themselves. The solution is in the hands of the legislators.
The FARC-EP claim to be a belligerent force that practices human rights taking into account the rebellion and free self determination of the Colombian people. Its objectives are to defend the interests of the national majority.

joram jojo:

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN's highest legal body, has started two weeks of hearings to hear a 1999 complaint filed by the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) accusing Uganda of invading its territory and massacring Congolese civilians.The DRC accuses Uganda of violating its territorial sovereignty, violating international humanitarian law and committing massive human rights violations. It is demanding reparations for destruction and looting allegedly carried out by Ugandan troops and "the restitution of national property and resources appropriated for the benefit of Uganda.

"Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo
(Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda)

The Court will hold public hearings from 11 to 29 April 2005

THE HAGUE, 6 December 2004. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), principal judicial organ of the United Nations, will hold public hearings in the case concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) from Monday 11 to Friday 29 April 2005 at the Peace Palace in The Hague, seat of the Court.

The precise schedule for those hearings will be announced later.

History of the proceedings

On 23 June 1999 the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against Uganda for “acts of armed aggression perpetrated in flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and of the Charter of the OAU”.

In its Application, the DRC contended that “such armed aggression . . . [had] involved inter alia violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the [DRC], violations of international humanitarian law and massive human rights violations”. The DRC sought “to secure the cessation of the acts of aggression directed against it, which constitute a serious threat to peace and security in central Africa in general and in the Great Lakes region in particular”; it also sought “compensation from Uganda in respect of all acts of looting, destruction, removal of property and persons and other unlawful acts attributable to [it], in respect of which the [DRC] reserves the right to determine at a later date the precise amount of the damage suffered, in addition to its claim for the restitution of all property removed”.