+   *    +     +     
About Us 
The Issues 
Our Research Products 
Order Publications 
Multimedia 
Press Room 
Resources for Monitor Researchers 
ARCHIVES HOME PAGE 
    >
Email Notification Receive notifications when this Country Profile is updated.

Sections



Send us your feedback on this profile

Send the Monitor your feedback by filling out this form. Responses will be channeled to editors, but will not be available online. Click if you would like to send an attachment. If you are using webmail, send attachments to .

Colombia

Last Updated: 08 November 2012

Casualties and Victim Assistance

Casualties[1]

Casualties Overview

All known casualties by end 2011

9,661 mine/ERW casualties (2,038 killed; 7,623 injured)

Casualties in 2011

538 (2010: 540)

2011 casualties by outcome

94 killed; 444 injured (2010: 56 killed; 484 injured)

2011 casualties by device type

521 antipersonnel mines; 17 other ERW

In 2011, the Presidential Program for Mine Action (PAICMA) recorded 538 casualties from antipersonnel mines and explosive remnants of war (ERW).[2] This represented the same level of annual casualties as compared with the 540 casualties recorded in 2010. Previously, the Monitor had identified a trend of declining casualty rates recorded between 2006 and 2010, a decline that had been ongoing since the peak of almost 1,200 casualties recorded annually in 2005 and 2006.[3]

There were at least 348 military casualties in 2011.[4] Casualties recorded as civilians (190) made up 35% of the total, similar to rates from previous years; civilians made up 30% of all casualties in 2010 and were about a third of all casualties in 2009 and 2008. Of civilian casualties, 21% (40) were children (32 boys; eight girls); this was nearly double the number of child casualties (21) in 2010, when they were 14% of civilian casualties. There were 10 casualties among women. The remainder, and the majority of recorded civilian casualties at some 74%, were adult men.

Casualties were recorded in 19 of Colombia’s 32 departments; however, more than half of all casualties occurred in just five departments: Antioquia (97), Nariño (62), Tolima (60), Cordoba (46) and Meta (46).

There were 21 civilian casualties among manual coca eradicators, employed by the Program for the Eradication of Illicit Cultivation (PCI), in 2011.[5] The number of casualties among security forces (police or military) was unknown.[6] This was a significant decrease compared with the 58 casualties among coca eradicators in 2010. Possible explanations for the reduced casualty rate among coca eradicators included improved safety procedures during manual eradication and a decrease in the area of land eradicated during the year.[7] From 2006 through the end of 2011, there were at least 287 civilian casualties recorded among coca eradicators; 37 died, 247 were injured, and it was unknown whether the remaining three casualties survived.[8]

Between 1982 and the end of 2011, PAICMA recorded 9,661 casualties (2,038 killed, 7,623 injured).[9] Civilians accounted for 38% (3,636) of the total and children accounted for 25% (919 casualties) of civilian casualties. The departments of Antioquia, Meta, Caquetá, and Norte de Santander registered the highest numbers of casualties and accounted for almost half of the total (47%).

Cluster munition casualties

As identified in Case No. 12.416, Santo Domingo Massacre v. Republic of Colombia, filed before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 17 civilians were killed and 27 were injured during a cluster strike in Santo Domingo, Colombia on 13 December 1998.[10] As of May 2012, Colombia stated that there had been no reported cases of cluster munition victims in the country as a result of cluster munitions use by the Colombia Air Force.[11]

Victim Assistance

Colombia is known to have landmine survivors and survivors of other types of ERW. Cluster munition victims have also been reported. As a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty and a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, Colombia has made a commitment to implementing victim assistance.

There were at least 7,623 mine/ERW survivors in Colombia as of the end of 2011.[12]

Victim Assistance since 1999[13]

Since monitoring began, mine/ERW survivors in Colombia have faced serious obstacles in accessing emergency medical attention, ongoing medical care and physical rehabilitation because these services have been available only in major cities while most mine incidents occur in rural and remote areas as well as in inaccessible conflict zones. In 1999, social and economic inclusion and psychological support for survivors was virtually nonexistent, even in most major cities, with the exception of two facilities in Bogota: the military hospital served military survivors and the Integral Center for Rehabilitation of Colombia (Centro Integral de Rehabilitación de Colombia, CIREC) served civilian survivors. Both facilities have consistently provided comprehensive rehabilitation services, including psychological support.

Throughout the period, a series of laws have outlined the rights of mine/ERW survivors as victims of terrorism or conflict through a comprehensive “Route of Attention”, which is the legal framework through which victims can access their rights to compensation, rehabilitation and other assistance by registering as victims and having the cost of assistance paid for or reimbursed through special government funds. However, complicated procedures to register as a mine victim and delayed reimbursements have meant that many survivors could not access the care they needed or had to depend on support from the ICRC and NGOs to facilitate access or pay for services.

In 2006, the ICRC began a mine action program in Colombia that included collecting data on mine/ERW casualties, helping survivors to access victim assistance and strengthening the physical rehabilitation sector to improve the quality and accessibility of these services. In 2009, the NGOs Mercy Corps and the Colombian Campaign Against Mines (CCCM) worked to decentralize physical rehabilitation services by supporting the opening of four new rehabilitation centers and improving the capacity of prosthetic technicians during the three year period of the project.

Through the work of CIREC, CCCM and others, more than 60 local disabled persons’ organizations and survivor associations have been formed since 1999, increasing opportunities for peer-to-peer support as well as social and economic inclusion.

Government coordination of victim assistance began in Colombia in 2002 through the Antipersonnel Mines Observatory, which was replaced in June 2007 with PAICMA. Throughout the period, victim assistance  coordination has been variable and at times lacking in continuity, a result of changes and restructuring within PAICMA and changes with the legal frameworks that outline the rights and assistance available to mine/ERW survivors.

Victim Assistance in 2011

Overall accessibility to victim assistance  decreased in 2011. International funding to NGOs which facilitated access to victim assistance  services, and/or provided those services, declined for 2011. In addition, the Law of Victims and Restitution of Land (Law 1448, also referred to below as the Victims Law), which was approved mid-way through the year, caused confusion for survivors and service providers regarding what assistance was available to mine/ERW survivors. The adoption of the law also heightened expectations of immediate assistance, although the regulations needed to begin implementing the law were only passed at the end of the year.[14] As of April 2012, the impact of this law had not yet been felt by mine/ERW survivors.[15]

As in previous years, registered survivors were entitled to a range of services through the “Route of Attention,” paid for through the government-managed Solidarity and Guarantee Fund, but most survivors relied on the ICRC, the Organization of American States (OAS) and numerous international and national NGOs to navigate complicated legal procedures and cover transportation and accommodation costs needed to access these services.

Assessing victim assistance needs

As a result of improved data collection efforts, NGOs and service providers said that mine/ERW victim registries in 2011 were more complete than in previous years, most especially for victims of recent mine/ERW incidents, a necessary step towards accessing government-supported services and programs for mine/ERW survivors.[16]

In 2011, PAICMA worked with departmental governments, the ICRC, the OAS, Handicap International (HI), CIREC, and CCCM to collect and verify information about survivors of recent mine/ERW incidents, with each organization collecting information in different geographic areas. CCCM held meetings of survivor networks and/or individual survivors in six heavily-affected departments to assess survivor needs and identify gaps in available service; CCCM then made the newly-collected information available to government representatives and service providers at the regional and national level.[17] The OAS Mine Action Program in Colombia collected information on the needs of survivors in several municipalities in the department of Antioquia and facilitated access to services for those most in need.[18] CIREC continued to collect data on the needs of mine survivors taking part in their rehabilitation programs.[19]

Casualty data was available through the PAICMA website and by request for government agencies and other service providers. In 2011, PAICMA began developing a process to cross-reference its casualty data with data managed by the victim assistance  unit of the Department of Social Prosperity, the government agency responsible for the administration of reparations.[20]

In 2011, PAICMA increased cooperation with victim assistance  stakeholders in the departments of Chocó and Putamayo and established agreements with the Awa people and with the National Parks System to improve data collection in these geographic areas and among Colombia’s indigenous population.[21]

PAICMA continued to identify and report on available victim assistance  services online.[22]

In 2011, mine incidents and victim assistance services provided to survivors continued to be recorded within the Epidemiological Monitoring System (Sistema de Vigilancia Epidemiológica, SIVIGILA) in the department of Antioquia. Despite plans to expand the adaptation to the SIVIGILA to include mine incidents and victim assistance services at the national level and interest expressed within two other mine-affected departments in particular, no steps were taken in this direction in 2011.[23]

Victim assistance coordination[24]

Government coordinating body/focal point

PAICMA

Coordinating mechanism

National Victim Assistance Committee and sub-committees at the national and departmental levels on information management, socio-economic inclusion, and psychosocial support with governmental and nongovernmental representatives; Executive Committee for the Comprehensive Reparation and Assistance for Victims of Violence (Comité Ejecutivo de Atención y Reparación Integral a las Víctimas, Executive Committee for Reparations)

Plan

Comprehensive “Route of Attention” for mine/ERW victims; draft National Plan for the Comprehensive Reparation and Assistance for Victims of Violence

In 2011, PAICMA, as the national victim assistance focal point, focused coordination efforts in three areas: 1) monitoring access to victim assistance for mine/ERW survivors; 2) strengthening the capacity of local and departmental authorities to promote the rights of mine/ERW victims; and 3) facilitating interministerial coordination. More specifically, PAICMA worked during the year to include the needs of mine/ERW victims in the implementation of the Victims Law and to reform the Route of Attention to align it with those benefits proscribed by the law.[25] Overall, NGOs felt that victim assistance coordination was not rigorous and lacked continuity, which prevented it from having a greater impact on improving victim assistance efforts.[26]

The National Victim Assistance Committee, facilitated by PAICMA, met twice during 2011. In March, the Committee met to identify obstacles preventing mine/ERW survivors from exercising their rights and accessing services and to develop a strategy to overcome those obstacles.[27] Some participants found this meeting to be ineffective due to its political nature and lack of follow-up.[28] With the passage of the Victims Law in June, the focus of the committee changed; it met in July to consider the implications of the law and to determine the best process to provide input into the regulations for and implementation of the law.

PAICMA facilitated decentralized victim assistance coordination in at least nine departments. Department-level mine action coordination meetings were held by PAICMA to provide trainings on the Route of Attention and also on the Victims Law for mine/ERW survivors and family members.[29] PAICMA also convened departmental meetings of the information management commission (which includes local government officials and representatives of NGOs) in Antioquia, Cauca and Nariño departments, among others. Meetings were designed to increase the capacity to collect, verify and exchange information about survivors and their needs at the departmental level.[30]

Several bilateral meetings were held between PAICMA and CCCM throughout the year to coordinate information on needs for victim assistance by civilians injured by mines during in coca eradication.[31]

The Executive Committee for Reparations is the government focal point for the implementation of the Victims Law. In order to ensure that the implementation of the law would address the needs of mine/ERW victims, along with other victims of conflict, PAICMA, survivors and organizations representing survivors participated in national and regional meetings of three subcommittees developing regulations for the law in the following areas:

·         information systems;

·         attention, assistance and rehabilitation; and

·         restitution, administrative compensation, protection and guarantees of non-repetition.

The subcommittees contributed to the development of the regulatory decree of the Victims Law, Decree 4800, approved 20 December 2011, and to the draft National Plan for the Comprehensive Reparation and Assistance for Victims of Violence, pending approval as of April 2012.[32]

To ensure the integration of mine/ERW survivors in the National Disability System during 2011, PAICMA continued participating in meetings of the National Disability Council, established in 2010. Disability Council meetings focused on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.[33]

Colombia provided detailed updates on progress and challenges for victim assistance (with information on the legal framework for victim assistance and coordination activities) at the Eleventh Meeting of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty in Phnom Penh in December 2011, at the Mine Ban Treaty intersessional meetings in Geneva in June 2011, and through its Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 report submitted for calendar year 2011.[34]

Survivor inclusion and participation

In 2011, survivors and their representative organizations participated in both meetings of the National Victim Assistance Committee and various departmental victim assistance coordination meetings. Survivors also participated in subcommittee meetings convened by the Executive Committee for the Comprehensive Reparation and Assistance for Victims of Violence.[35] Since they were not provided with information on the topics to be discussed prior to subcommittee meetings, survivors were not prepared to participate actively.[36] Survivors and other persons with disabilities contributed to the design and implementation of victim assistance activities through NGOs and survivors associations, most particularly concerning economic inclusion programs and peer support.[37] The city government of Medellin included survivors in the provision of psychological support.[38]

Within the framework of the Victims Law, the Colombian government convened seven regional meetings of conflict victims (including mines/ERW survivors) and NGOs to discuss the needs of conflict victims and to consider the best way to address these needs through the implementation of the law.[39] Information collected during these meetings was used in the development of a National Plan for the Comprehensive Reparation and Assistance for Victims of Violence.[40]

Survivors or their representative associations were not invited to contribute to the government statements on progress in victim assistance in 2011 that were prepared in anticipation of international meetings of States Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty, nor did any survivors participate as members of the official Colombian delegation to such meetings or to intersessional Standing Committee meetings.[41]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[42]

Name of organization

Type of organization

Type of activity

Changes in quality/coverage of service in 2011

PAICMA

National government

Coordination, data management, and awareness-raising for governmental and nongovernmental actors on available victim assistance efforts and how to access them

Ongoing

Ministry of Social Protection

National government

Administration of the Solidarity and Guarantee Fund (FOSYGA) to cover rehabilitative care for victims of conflict, including mine/ERW survivors; regulated physical rehabilitation

Produced guide for trauma surgery with ICRC; other activities ongoing

Ministry of Health

National government

Emergency and continuing medical care

Ongoing

Medellin City Hall (Office of the Mayor)

City government

Psychosocial support to survivors as part of its program for victims of conflict

Ongoing; provided training in psychological support to leaders of eight survivor associations

CCCM

National NGO

Strengthened emergency medical response in conflict areas; transportation and accommodation to access services; legal advice; awareness-raising on survivors’ rights and advocacy

Ongoing

CIREC

National NGO

Physical rehabilitation, including mobile outreach to remote regions; social and economic inclusion through formation of survivors associations, peer support, income-generating projects, and capacity-building; at least one program (with Fundación Mi Sangre) focused on female heads of households

All programs ongoing; increased geographic coverage through mobile outreach; slight decrease in number of beneficiaries; new psychosocial program for child and youth survivors

Fundacion REI

National NGO

Physical rehabilitation and psychological support for mine/ERW survivors referred by HI and the ICRC

Ongoing

Pastoral Social

National NGO with link to international organization

Psychosocial support, income-generating projects; transportation and accommodation to access services

Ongoing

Tierra de Paz

National NGO

Transportation and accommodation to access services, and legal advice for survivors in Cauca department

Ongoing

Colombian Association of Antipersonnel Mine Survivors

Local survivor association

Peer support, referrals, and assistance to access services

Ongoing

Mercy Corps

International NGO

Capacity-building for rehabilitation services for mine/ERW survivors in southwestern Colombia, including technical training for prosthetists and establishment of two new rehabilitation centers (Nariño, Cauca, and Putumayo departments), in cooperation with CCCM

Opening of Comprehensive Rehabilitation Center in Caqueta; Program ended in August decreasing access to economic inclusion in six departments

HI

International NGO

Training for health professionals on attending mine/ERW survivors; raising-awareness of survivors’ rights and available benefits; formation of peer support groups; psychosocial assistance; facilitating access to services; income-generating projects; and inclusion of survivors in local government committees

Increased project coverage from five to 10 departments and more than tripled number of beneficiaries as compared with 2010

Organization of American States (OAS)

International organization

Transportation and accommodation to access services; support for services not covered through government support or for people unable to register; and economic inclusion activities

Ongoing

ICRC

International organization

Weapon contamination victim data gathering including mine/ERW casualties; materials and/or training support to eight physical rehabilitation centers; emergency medical care and evacuation; accommodation, transportation, and food for survivors and family members to support access to services; covered cost of service for survivors unable to register for government support; micro-economic inclusion project; disseminated information on victims’ rights among communities and local authorities

Number of survivors receiving prosthetics remained steady; decrease in number of unregistered survivors receiving support by 63%; other activities ongoing

In 2011, the bureaucratic procedures necessary to register for victim assistance benefits remained complicated; some service providers were unwilling to assist survivors due to slow and incomplete reimbursements for medical and rehabilitative care by the Administration of the Solidarity and Guarantee Fund (FOSYGA).[43] Numerous NGOs continued making ongoing efforts to assist survivors in the process of registering for government support.[44] Despite these efforts, 385 survivors were unable to access government support because they lacked the proper documentation to register and instead received comprehensive assistance from the ICRC in 2011.[45]

To improve emergency medical care, particularly the management of injuries from weapons, the Ministry of Social Protection, with support from the ICRC, produced and provided both a technical guide and trained surgeons from regional hospitals in mine-affected departments.[46] The ICRC and the Colombian Red Cross provided community-based first aid training in 12 regions of the country.[47] NGOs reported that their work with medical professionals to raise awareness about the rights of survivors to use emergency medical care resulted in improved access to these services.[48] Most hospitals were able to provide emergency medical care specific to the needs of child survivors, though access to ongoing medical care for children was difficult.[49] No significant changes in access to or quality of ongoing medical assistance for mine/ERW survivors were identified and the CCCM found that only 20% of survivors received the specialized medical attention that they needed.[50]

The availability of physical rehabilitation services increased in 2011 with the opening of a new rehabilitation center in Florencia, Caqueta, a department with some of the highest levels of mine/ERW survivors in Colombia.[51] Training opportunities for rehabilitation technicians increased with a new program by the ICRC to offer training to technicians from all rehabilitation centers. It also continued to support long-term professionalization of technicians from ICRC-supported centers.[52] The CCCM, along with Mercy Corps, continued to support training for prosthetists in mine-affected departments.[53] In the second half of the year, there were multiple cases identified of mine/ERW survivors who were refused rehabilitation services to which they were entitled on the mistaken basis that such benefits were suspended until the beginning of the implementation of the new Victims Law.[54]

In 2011, as part of its program for victims of conflict, the Medellin city government trained the leaders of several survivor associations in the provision of psychosocial attention for survivors.[55] Several NGO programs continued to provide psychosocial support, including peer support, as part of assistance programs for survivors.[56] As in previous years, nearly all psychological support programs were provided by NGOs with international support. These efforts, while numerous, were insufficient to meet the level of need and were hampered by decreasing levels of international support for NGOs.[57]

Overall, decreasing levels of international funding to NGOs were identified as also causing decreased availability of economic-inclusion opportunities.[58] Government support for economic inclusion was limited to vocational training that was not considered to be adapted to the needs of survivors or other persons with disabilities.[59] With the completion of the Mercy Corps/CCCM economic inclusion program in six mine affected departments, opportunities for this kind of support declined in 2011.[60]

Schools in rural areas were not adapted to the needs of children with disabilities and a scarcity of school transportation in these areas prevented child mine/ERW survivors from fulfilling their right to education.[61] Two articles of the Victims Law relate to the situation of child landmine survivors and require the provision of age-appropriate services to war victims. While the impact of this law had not yet been felt in 2011, it held the potential to improve access to assistance for child survivors.[62]

As of April 2011, 64% of registered mine/ERW survivors had accessed compensation and other benefits through assistance programs for victims of conflict.[63] Almost all newly registered civilian survivors were informed about their rights to apply for government assistance.[64] No information was available on how many of these new survivors submitted applications or received benefits.

Colombia has legislation to protect the rights of persons with disabilities and efforts were made to enforce these rights in 2011. There is no law requiring access to public buildings, to information, or to telecommunications, but there were some national and local government programs underway during the year to increase accessibility.[65]

During the second half of 2011, PAICMA set out to make mine/ERW survivors aware of their rights under the new Victims Law.[66] However, more and clearer information was needed; as of the end of the year, a great deal of confusion and misinformation remained around the law’s implications for survivors.[67]

Colombia ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 5 May 2011.



[1] Unless otherwise noted, all casualty data is based on Monitor analysis of PAICMA, “Situación Nacional 1990–Mayo 2012” (“National Situation 1990–May 2012”), undated, www.accioncontraminas.gov.co, accessed 2 July 2012.

[2] Nearly all explosives that are victim-activated and that can be triggered by an individual are referred to as antipersonnel mines in Colombia. However, these are not caused by industrially-produced antipersonnel mines, but rather by victim-activated improvised explosive devices and ERW. ICRC, “Weapon contamination programming Colombia Activities and results achieved in 2010,” Bogota, undated, p. 2, document provided to the Monitor by email from Matthieu Laruelle, Regional Advisor for Latin America, Weapon Contamination Program, ICRC, 20 April 2011.

[3] The Monitor previously reported the casualty total for 2010 to be 512. However, as of May 2012, the total had been revised upward to 540 as additional casualties were identified for that year. PAICMA, “Situación Nacional 1990–Mayo 2012” (“National Situation 1990–May 2012”), undated, www.accioncontraminas.gov.co, accessed 2 July 2012.

[4] Of the 348 military casualties, 65 were killed and 283 injured. PAICMA did not identify any casualties among non-state armed groups.

[5] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Director, Multilateral Political Issues, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[6] As of April 2012, PAICMA had data only on those casualties occurring among civilian eradicators. Civilian eradicators are accompanied by police or military that conduct emergency demining and provide other protection. In 2011, PAICMA requested this casualty data from PCI but as of April 2012, it had not been received. Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[7] Interviews with Daniel Avila, Director, PAICMA, in Geneva, 23 May 2012; and Alvaro Jimenez, Director, Colombian Campaign against Mines (CCCM), in Geneva, 23 May 2012.

[8] As with casualties in 2011, cumulative data on casualties among the police or military who accompany civilian eradicators was not available as of May 2012. PAICMA, “Eradicator Victims by Department and by Year” (“Victimas Erradicadores por Departamento y Año),” undated, provided by email from Milton Fernando García Lozano, Information Management, PAICMA, 13 September 2011; and Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[9] While PAICMA data covers a range from 1982 through 2011, just two casualties occurred prior to 1990.

[10] The findings of the filing before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights are based on the final ruling issued in 2002 by the Office of the Procurator General of Colombia during the national court case. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Case No. 12.416, Santo Domingo Massacre v. Republic of Colombia, 8 July 2011, Article 32. With the case pending as of 30 September 2012, Colombia would not confirm or deny the 44 cluster munition casualties resulting from the December 1998 bombing. Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012; and interview with Daniel Avila, PAICMA, in Oslo, 12 September 2012. These casualties have been included in the global total of cluster munition casualties over time.

[11] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[12] PAICMA, “Situación Nacional 1990–Mayo 2012” (“National Situation 1990–May 2012”), undated, www.accioncontraminas.gov.co, accessed 2 July 2012.

[13] See previous Colombia country profiles in the Monitor, www.the-monitor.org.

[14] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, National Mine Action Coordinator, HI, 30 March 2012.

[15] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[16] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[17] Activities were held in the departments of Nariño, Cauca, Meta, Caquetá, Norte de Santander and Antioquia. Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[18] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Luz Marina Revelo Quiroga, Victim Assistance Program, OAS, 18 April 2012.

[19] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Jorge Enrique Quesada, Coordinator, Community Based Rehabilitation Program, CIREC, 2 April 2012.

[20] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[21] Ibid.

[22] PAICMA, “Mapa de Actores en Asistencia a Víctimas y Educación en el Riesgo” (“Mapping of Victim Assistance and Mine Risk Education Actors”), www.accioncontraminas.gov.co; and response to Monitor questionnaire by Luz Marina Revelo Quiroga, OAS, 18 April 2012.

[23] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[24] Ibid.

[25] Ibid. For more information about the victim assistance program, please visit PAICMA’s website, www.accioncontraminas.gov.co.

[26] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012.

[27] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[28] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[29] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[30] Ibid.

[31] Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[32] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[33] Statement of Colombia, Eleventh Meeting of States Parties, Mine Ban Treaty, Phnom Penh, 1 December 2011.

[34] Ibid.; Statement of Colombia, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration, Geneva, 23 May 2012; and Mine Ban Treaty Article 7 Report, 25 April 2012.

[35] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[36] Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[37]Ibid.; and by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012.

[38] Council of Medellin, “Alcaldía de Medellín certificó 87 acompañantes del duelo y 8 líderes de organizaciones de víctimas” (“Mayor’s Office of Medellin certified 87 grief counselors and 8 leaders of survivor organizations”), 17 November 2011, www.programa-atencionavictimas.blogspot.com/2011/11/alcaldia-de-medellin-certifico-87.html.

[39] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[40] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[41] Ibid.; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[42] There were numerous service providers throughout Colombia, both public and private, that provided assistance to persons with disabilities, including mine survivors, during 2011. Only those that had some focus on mine/ERW survivors and provided updated information have been included here. ICRC Physical Rehabilitation Programme, “Annual Report 2011,” Geneva, May 2012, p. 65-66; Council of Medellin, “Alcaldía de Medellín certificó 87 acompañantes del duelo y 8 líderes de organizaciones de víctimas” (“Mayor’s Office of Medellin certified 87 grief counselors and 8 leaders of survivor organizations”), 17 November 2011, www.programa-atencionavictimas.blogspot.com/2011/11/alcaldia-de-medellin-certifico-87.html; Fundación Mi Sangre, “Management Report 2011,” Medellín, 2012, p. 14; ICRC, “Situación Humanitaria Informe de Actividades Colombia 2011” (“Humanitarian Situation Activity Report Colombia 2011”), Bogota, March 2012; and responses to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012; by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012; by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by Luz Marina Revelo Quiroga, OAS, 18 April 2012.

[43] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 13 June 2011; and interviews with survivors and their families by Carlos Alberto Guarin Florez, Risk Education and Victim Assistance Project, Pastoral Social, 25 May 2011.

[44] CCCM, HI, and ICRC all supported survivors in registering for government support in 2011.

[45] ICRC PRP, “Annual Report 2011,” Geneva, May 2012, p. 65.

[46] ICRC, “Annual Report 2011,” Geneva, May 2012, p. 335.

[47] ICRC, “Situación Humanitaria Informe de Actividades Colombia 2011” (“Humanitarian Situation Activity Report Colombia 2011”), Bogota, March 2012, p. 49.

[48] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[49] Email from Camilo Serna, Operational Coordinator, CCCM, 16 October 2012.

[50] Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[51] Ibid.

[52] ICRC, “Situación Humanitaria Informe de Actividades Colombia 2011” (“Humanitarian Situation Activity Report Colombia 2011”), Bogota, March 2012, p. 38.

[53] Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[54] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012.

[55] Council of Medellin, “Alcaldía de Medellín certificó 87 acompañantes del duelo y 8 líderes de organizaciones de víctimas” (“Mayor’s Office of Medellin certified 87 grief counselors and 8 leaders of survivor organizations”), 17 November 2011, www.programa-atencionavictimas.blogspot.com/2011/11/alcaldia-de-medellin-certifico-87.html.

[56] See Victim assistance activities in table for more details.

[57] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012; and by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012.

[58] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012.

[59] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012.

[60] Response to Monitor questionnaire by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.

[61] Email from Camilo Serna, CCCM, 16 October 2012.

[62] Colombian Law 1448 of 2011, 10 June 2011, Articles 180 and 189.

[63] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[64] Statement of Colombia, Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee on Victim Assistance and Socio-economic Reintegration, Geneva, 22 June 2011.

[65] US Department of State, “2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Colombia,” Washington, DC, 24 May 2012.

[66] Response to Monitor questionnaire by Sonia Matilde Eljach Polo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 19 April 2012.

[67] Responses to Monitor questionnaire by Jorge Enrique Quesada, CIREC, 2 April 2012; by Johana Huertas Reyes, HI, 30 March 2012; and by the Victim Assistance Unit of the CCCM, 23 April 2012.