Constitutional Court of Colombia, Second Review Chamber, Auto N° 251 de 2008 - Colombia
Background
In Sentence T-025 of 2004 (T-025-04), the Constitutional Court declared a state of unconstitutionality with respect to the Colombian State’s failure to protect the constitutional rights of victims of forced displacement, and in particular, displaced children and adolescents. This Auto (in Colombia, autos are judicial decisions that “resolve an incident or substantive issue” (art. 161 Law 906 of 2004)) was a review of the State’s response to the T-025-04 Decision and presents information concerning the current situation of displaced children.
Reasoning
The Court affirmed that victims of forced displacement are entitled to special State treatment. More specifically, the Court, relying on the Constitution, stated that, “each individual case of children displaced by armed violence in Colombia, was, in itself, an extreme manifestation of profound, serious, systematic and simultaneous violations of fundamental rights”, given their “state of grave victimisation and defencelessness” (p.2). Displaced children were affected by the following specific cross-cutting problems: lack of protection from several risks and dangers that threaten their rights; hunger and malnutrition; preventable physical and mental health deficiencies; shortcomings in the educational system and lack of opportunities for recreation and participation in society as well as for exercising their rights. The impact of these issues on children was further aggravated by changes to family structures due to displacement, the trauma of displacement itself, childhood, adolescence, gender inequality, ethnic divergence and disability.
The Court noted that violent crimes by armed groups (including “social cleansing”), forced recruitment into armed groups or illicit businesses (e.g., drug trafficking and child trafficking), sexual abuse (in the context of armed groups and at home) and coercive pressure by illegal armed groups were the principal causal factors of the forced displacement of children.
To address the unique vulnerabilities of displaced children and the unique and disproportionate impact displacement has on them, specific measures were required from the State. However, the Court considered that the Colombian State had failed to implement such measures. In the opinion of the Court, the State response to the specific needs of displaced children had been "(i) irregular and fragmented, neither systematic nor comprehensive, (iii) non-specific, (iv) late, (iv) lacking resources, (v) legal and formal, with no practical realisation, and (vi) lacking a preventive approach” (p. 23). The failure to treat these children, in practice, as subjects of international and domestic law with prevailing and directly enforceable rights and as subjects of special protection, attempted against their human dignity.
The Court observed that displaced children were generally “invisible” to the State and society at large. This was due in part to a lack of registration of displaced persons, caused by widespread distrust of authorities and a lack of awareness of constitutional rights amongst displaced persons.
Given the multiplicity of factors affecting displaced children and the absence of measures aimed specifically at them, the State’s efforts to date were inadequate and amounted to a breach of its domestic and international legal obligations.
Remedy
The Court ordered the relevant public authorities to remedy the state of unconstitutionality by adopting concrete measures exclusively aimed at displaced children that are preventative and that address their specific needs. In particular, it ordered the creation and implementation of a programme based on pilot projects, which were also ordered in the decision, for the protection of children, containing prevention and care elements and giving response to the risks, cross-cutting problems and factors that aggravated these children’s situations. The Court also required the State to guarantee the participation of at least those civil society organisations that are listed in the decision in the elaboration of pilot projects.
Role of children
While the case addressed displaced Colombian children in general, 18,000 children were individually identified to the Court. The Court ordered the State to address these children’s specific situations. Displaced children were heard at a public technical information hearing held on 28 June 2007 before the same Chamber and their testimony was cited throughout the judgment.
Enforcement and other outcomes
The Court ordered the relevant State authorities, under the coordination of Acción Social, to:
(i) design and implement a new programme specifically aimed at the protection of displaced children. The programme shall focus on: (1) preventing the disproportionate impact of forced displacement on children; and (2) giving attention to displaced children;
(ii) design and implement fifteen (15) pilot projects across Colombia to address risks related to armed conflict and the most concerning specific problems; and
(iii) give specific attention to the approximately 18,000 displaced children whose individual circumstances were reported to the court.
Progress in this regard was monitored directly by the Constitutional Court through autos (see auto 756 of 2018). Auto 756 of 2018 offered a full review of the extent to which the State implemented the measures ordered by the Court. Existing public policies aimed at forcibly displaced children were deemed inadequate, and the State’s level of compliance to orders issued in Sentence T-025-04 and Auto 251 was deemed low. The Court ordered a series of concrete actions to redress this situation.
Significance of the case from a CRSL perspective
The case highlighted barriers to the enjoyment of displaced children’s rights (including right special protection, right to food, right to physical and mental health, right to education and right to participation). It also resulted in increased legal protection of children’s rights in this and future CRSL cases through its identification of legal provisions obliging the State to provide a differential treatment to displaced children which meets their specific needs.
Through detailed analysis of the causes and features of forced displacement of children, the Court identified the complexity of factors that prevent children from enjoying their constitutional right and which must be addressed in a targeted and appropriate manner in order to ensure the effective enjoyment of rights of forcibly displaced children. These include cultural and social factors on a family, community and national level.
Country
Colombia
Forum and date of decision
Constitutional Court, Second Review Chamber, Republic of Colombia / Corte Constitucional, Sala Segunda de Revisión, República de Colombia
October 6, 2008
CRC provisions and other international law provisions/sources
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child – Articles 2(1), 3(2), 4, 6, 7(1), 12(1), 15(1), 18, 19, 20(1), 23, 24, 27, 28, 30-39 and 44
Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict – Articles 1,2, 5 and 9
American Convention on Human Rights – Article 19
American Declaration of Human Rights – Article VII
Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague Convention IV) – Preamble (Martens Clause); Article 46
Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (ILO Convention 182) – Articles 1, 3
European Convention on Human Rights – Article 3
Geneva Convention of 1949 – Articles 3, 4(3)
Additional Protocol II of 1977 to the Geneva Convention of 1949 – Article 4
UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement – Principles 4(2), 5, 6(1), 11(2); 18-20
Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment, and Eradication of Violence Against Women (Belém do Pará Convention) – Articles 1, 3, 7 and 8
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Article 24(1)
Lieber Code – Article 44
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – Article 7(1)(g)
UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women – Article 6
Universal Declaration of Human Rights – Article 25(2)
Domestic law provisions
Constitution of Colombia, Articles 2, 5, 11, 12, 44, 45, 83
Decree 564 of 2006 regulating the provisions related to urban planning licenses; the inspection of buildings; the public function performed by the urban planners; the legalization of human settlements consisting of low-income housing; and other provisions – Articles 3, 41, 49, 51, 52, 56, 63, 68
Law 1098 of 2006 issuing the Code of Infancy and Adolescence – Articles 20 and 41
Law 833 of 2003 approving the Optional CRC Protocol (OPAC) – Article 4
Law 759 of 2002 issuing regulations concerning anti-personnel Mines
Law 400 of 1997, by which rules concerning construction of seismic-resistant buildings are approved – Articles 2, 18 and 19
Law 388 of 1997 amending previous statutes concerning the functioning of municipalities – Articles 36, 37, 91, 92, 103, 117, 120
Law 136 of 1994, by which provisions are issued to modernize the organization and operation of the municipalities. Articles 1, 3, 5, 187
Related information
Colombian State Entities addressed by the Auto:
Sistema Nacional de Atención Integral a la Población Desplazada (SNAIPD or SNARIV) (National System for Comprehensive Assistance to the Displaced Population - Carrera 85D No. 46A - 65, Complejo logístico San Cayetano, Bogotá, 111071
Intituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar (Colombian Institute for Family Wellbeing) - Av. Carrera 68 # 64C - 75 Bogotá, Colombia 111061
Acción Social - Carrera 10 #97a – 13, Torre A - Piso 6, Edificio Bogotá Trade Center, Bogotá, Colombia
The Ministry of Defence - Carrera 54 No. 26 - 25 CAN, Bogotá, Colombia
Ministry of Education – Calle 43 No. 57 - 14. Centro Administrativo Nacional, CAN, Bogotá, Colombia
Ministry of the Interior – Edificio Camargo, Calle 12 B No. 8 – 42, Bogotá, Colombia
Ministry of Justice – Calle 53 No. 13 - 27 Bogotá D.C, Colombia, 110231
Ministry of Social Protection – Carrera 13 No. 32-76 piso 1, Bogotá 110311, Colombia
NGOs to be involved in the design of programmes ordered by the Auto:
Coalico (Coalition against the involvement of Children and Young People in Armed Conflict) - Carrera 26 No. 61 C – 51 – Bogotá, Colombia
CODHES (Supervisory Commission on Public Policy of Forced Displacement) – Carrera 6 #34 -62 Oficina 302 Bogotá, Colombia
Fundación Dos Mundos (Two Worlds Foundation) – Carrera 5 #67-12, Comuna Chapinero, Bogotá, Colombia
Fundación Restrepo Barco – Carrera 7 No. 73-55, Piso 12, Tel.: (571) 7452572, Bogotá, Colombia
Norwegian Refugee Council – Prinsensgate 2, 0152 Oslo, Norway
Pastoral Social de la Iglesia Católica (Pastoral Society of the Catholic Church) - Calle 51 # 47 – 21, Curia Episcopal, Rionegro P.B.X.: 531 7999 ext. 104
Amicus curiae:
Carlos Skliar – Senior Researcher at the National Council for Scientific and Technological Research of Argentina (CONICET) and Senior Researcher in the Education Area of the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO), Argentina.
Other relevant entities/parts:
18,000 children as identified in Annex 1 [public judgment excludes Annex 1]
National University of Colombia – Carrera 45, Bogotá, Colombia
Procuraduría General de la Nación (the National Attorney-General’s Office) - Carrera 5 # 15-80, Bogotá D.C., Colombia, 11032
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees – Case Postale 2500, CH-1211 Genève 2 Dépôt, Switzerland
Case documents
'Informes De La Comisión' (Consultoría para los Derechos Humanos y el Desplazamiento (CODHES)) <https://codhes.wordpress.com/comision-de-seguimiento/informes-de-la-comision/> accessed 30 March 2022
Nal, 'Primera Infancia, Niñez Y Adolescencia En Situación De Desplazamiento Propuesta De Indicadores De Goce Efectivo De Derechos' (National University of Colombia and Plan International 2011) <http://equidadparalainfancia.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Desplazamiento-INDICADORES-DE-GOCE-EFECTIVO-DE-DERECHOS-OBSI.pdf> accessed 30 March 2022
'Lineamientos Jurídicos Y Administrativos Del Estado Colombiano Para La Atención A Los Niños, Niñas Y Adolescentes Desvinculados Del Conflicto Armado' (Procuraduría General de la Nación and UNICEF Bogotá DC, Colombia 2006) <https://www.acnur.org/fileadmin/Documentos/Publicaciones/2007/5523.pdf?view=1> accessed 30 March 2022
'Estado Nutricional, De Alimentación Y Condiciones De Salud De La Población Desplazada Por La Violencia En Seis Subregiones Del País' (World Food Programme 2005) <https://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/liaison_offices/wfp086486.pdf> accessed 30 March 2022
Ojeda G, and Murad R, Salud Sexual Y Reproductiva En Zonas Marginadas (Asociación Probienestar de la Familia Colombiana (Profamilia) and Agencia para el Desarrollo Social (USAID) 2005) <https://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/53238;jsessionid=DAA04FD22ABB0D8BFB85FE4C61BFE95F>
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: Concluding Observations, Colombia CRC/C/COL/CO/3, 8 June 2006 <https://www.refworld.org/docid/45377ee30.html>
UN General Assembly, Children and armed conflict: report of the Secretary-General, 21 December 2007, A/62/609–S/2007/757, 21 December 2007 <https://www.refworld.org/docid/479f54592.html>
General Secretariat, Organization of the American States, 'Violence And Discrimination Against Women In The Armed Conflict In Colombia' (Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 2022) <https://www.cidh.oas.org/pdf%20files/InformeColombiaMujeres2006eng.pdf> accessed 30 March 2022
Secondary documents
'Volver A Estudiar, La Agonía De Los Niños Desplazados' (Vanguardia, 2013) <https://www.vanguardia.com/colombia/volver-a-estudiar-la-agonia-de-los-ninos-desplazados-DCVL235305> accessed 30 March 2022
'Acción Integral Contra Minas Antipersonal - AICMA' (Government of Colombia) <http://www.accioncontraminas.gov.co/AICMA> accessed 4 April 2022
Patiño-Montaña Y, 'Cómo Vive El Desplazamiento La Población Infantil Aquitanense, Víctima Del Conflicto Armado' (2018) 14 Derecho y Realidad <https://doi.org/10.19053/16923936.v14.n28.2016.7816>
González Ocampo L, and Bedmar Moreno M, 'Población Infantil En Situación De Desplazamiento Forzado En Colombia Y Sus Manifestaciones De Ciudadanía' (2016) 2 Derecho y Realidad < https://doi.org/10.19053/16923936.v2.n24.2014.4548>
Sánchez Cubides P, 'La Política Pública Como Garantía De Derechos De La Primera Infancia En Colombia' (2018) 16 Derecho y Realidad <https://doi.org/10.19053/16923936.v16.n31.2018.9105>
UNICEF Colombia, 'Infancia En Tiempos De Guerra: ¿Los Niños De Colombia Conocerán Por Fin La Paz?' (UNICEF 2016) <https://www.unicef.org/sites/default/files/press-releases/glo-media-UNICEF_CHILD_ALERT_COLOMBIA_ESPANOL_19_03_16__FINAL.pdf> accessed 4 April 2022
Alianza por la Niñez Colombiana, 'Niñez víctima de un conflicto armado que persiste. Informe de seguimiento a la implementación de recomendaciones del Comité de los Derechos del Niño a los informes periódicos IV y V combinados de Colombia' (2018) <https://www.refworld.org.es/pdfid/5bec60444.pdf>
Constitutional Court of Colombia, Sentencia T-025 de 2004 - Colombia
Background
This case involved 108 files that had been joined by the Court. These concerned 108 tutela actions submitted by 1150 family units, all belonging to the displaced population, and composed mainly of women heads of household, elderly persons and children, as well as some indigenous persons. A number of these tutela actions were filed by civil society organisations on behalf of displaced persons. The complainants claimed that authorities were not fulfilling their mandate to protect the displaced population in terms of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution and were failing to respond effectively to the complainants’ requests for housing, health care, education, humanitarian aid and access to state aid for their integration into the labour market and the implementation of economically profitable projects. The majority of these tutela actions had been rejected by the judges at the lower courts.
Reasoning
The Court stated that due to the conditions of extreme vulnerability in which the displaced population finds itself, as well as the repeated omission to provide them with timely and effective protection on the part of the various authorities responsible for their care, the rights of both the actors in the case and the displaced population in general were violated. Specifically, it referred to the right to a dignified life and to personal integrity (Arts. 1 and 12 of the Constitution and UN Guiding Principles 1, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 15), to equality (Art. 13 of the Constitution and UN Guiding Principles 1 to 4, 6, 9 and 22), to petition, to work and to social security (Art. 6 of the Constitution , Law 387 of 1997 and UN Guiding Principles 1, 3, 4, 11 and 18), to health (Arts. 49 and 50 of the Constitution and UN Guiding Principles 1, 2 and 19), to education (Art. 67(3) of the Constitution and UN Guiding Principle 23), to the minimum conditions for life (UN Guiding Principles 18, 24 and 27) and to the due special protection (Arts. 42 and 44 of the Constitution and UN Guiding Principles 2, 4, 9 and 17) for the elderly, women heads of household and children.
The Court defined the minimum levels of protection that must be guaranteed in a timely and effective manner to the displaced population in the face of insufficient resources or deficiencies in institutional capacity. According to the Court, this determination of minimum standards implies that “(i) in no case may the essential core of the fundamental constitutional rights of displaced persons be threatened and (ii) the State has to satisfy the minimum level of the rights to life, to dignity, to physical, psychological and moral integrity, to family unity, to the provision of urgent and basic health services, to protection against discriminatory practices based on the condition of being displaced, and to the right to education up to the age of fifteen in the case of children in a situation of displacement.” (p. 32).
The existence of an unconstitutional state of affairs with regard to the situation of the displaced population was declared by the Court on the basis of the lack of concordance between (a) the seriousness of the impact on constitutionally recognised rights developed by law, and (b) the volume of resources allocated to ensure the effective enjoyment of such rights and the institutional capacity to implement them. The Court also relied on the high number of tutela actions filled by displaced persons, which confirmed the impact these violations had had on a large part of this population group, and the structural nature of the issue, since the violations were attributable to various state bodies.
Remedy
The Court ordered a series of actions related to the unconstitutional state of affairs aimed at guaranteeing the rights of the entire displaced population, regardless of whether they had sought protection of their rights through tutela actions. The aim with the order was to force the government to reassess and restructure the actions or omissions that led to the violation of the Constitution and legislation in the shortest possible time, providing sufficient opportunities for the participation of displaced people’s representatives, to ensure that displaced people, including children, could effectively enjoy their rights. The Court also ordered a series of actions aimed at responding to the specific requests of the complainants in the tutela action in line with the Court’s previous jurisprudence on the rights of displaced population. These actions included: (i) addressing requests to access financial support programmes (including temporary jobs, business projects, training and food security) and housing, (ii) determining whether requests for registration in the Unified Registry of Displaced Populations meet the objective conditions of displacement and, if so, giving them immediate access to the assistance envisaged for their protection, (iii) effectively granting the requested humanitarian aid to those who applied for it, (iv) guaranteeing the complainants’ effective access to the health system, ensuring that they are provided with the required medicines, (v) ensuring effective access to the education system for children until the age of fifteen and (vi) registering information regarding displaced people’s land properties in order to effectively protect them.
Role of children
Children were petitioners in the tutela actions. They were represented by adults, mostly legal representatives of the civil organisations involved.
Enforcement and other outcomes
The decision forced the government to reassess and restructure the actions and omissions that led to the violation of the Constitution and the legislation in the shortest possible time to ensure that displaced people, including children, could effectively enjoy their rights. The court ordered a series of concrete actions to be carried out by the authorities to this end. This decision is followed by two orders (Autos 251-05 and 756-08), which focus specifically on assessing and monitoring the rights of displaced children. In these Autos, the Constitutional Court described progress in this regard as “low”.
Significance of the case from a CRSL perspective
Although the litigation was not brought solely to protect the rights of displaced children, its aim was to stop the massive violation of fundamental rights of displaced people, which affects displaced children as well. The decision forces the government to reassess and restructure the actions or omissions that led to the violation to ensure the effective enjoyment of the rights of this vulnerable group. This implies the obligation to adopt clear policies in favour of displaced people, including children. The state of unconstitutional affairs enables the Constitutional Court to make the effects of the decision applicable to all and to directly monitor compliance with the ruling (see Autos 251-08 and 756-18).
Country
Colombia
Forum and date of decision
Constitutional Court, Third Review Chamber, Republic of Colombia/Corte Constitucional, Sala Tercera de Revisión, República de Colombia
22 January 2004
CRC provisions and other international law provisions/sources
UN Guiding Principles on internal displacement (UN Doc. E/CN./4/1998/53/Add.2 of 17 April 1998)
Domestic law provisions
Constitution of Colombia, arts. 1, 2, 4.2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 42, 44, 49, 67.3, 83, 85, 86.3, 93, 113, 241.9, 345, 346 and 350.1 (English translation)
Decree 2591 of 1991, by which the action of tutela enshrined in Article 86 of the Political Constitution is regulated, arts. 10, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 38
Administrative Litigation Code, art 5.
Circular 0042 of 2002 on sources of financing for health care for the displaced population
Law 387 of 1997, by which measures are adopted for the prevention of forced displacement; the care, protection, consolidation and socio-economic stabilisation of those internally displaced by violence in the Republic of Colombia, arts. 1, 3, 6 and 22. (English translation)
Decree 2569 of 2000, by which Law 387 of 1997 is partially regulated and other provisions are issued, arts. 7, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27
Related information
For the applicants:
Municipal ombudsman of Neiva - Jorge Osorio Peña
Calle 8 no. 12-22 Neiva-Huila
Fundación Ayudémonos FUNDAYUDE - Javier Augusto Silva Madero, legal representative
Asociación Humanitaria de Colombia (ahudeco@hotmail.com) - Jorge E Peralta de Brigard, legal representative
Asociación de Desplazados del Caribe Colombiano - Juvenal Navarro Arroyo, legal representative
Asociación por un mejor vivir feliz - Deyanira Herrera, legal representative
Asociación Nueva Vida (alonsovifi@hotmail.com) - Eduardo Orozco, legal representative
Asociación Nuevo Horizonte - Pedro Pacheco, legal representative
Calle 1B # 55 – 74 Cali-Colombia
Asociación Desplazados Unidos - Ismael Maestre, legal representative
Asociación Asodespente - Juan Montes, legal representative
Asociación Justicia y Paz (cauca@justiciaypazcolombia.com) - Jony Meriño, legal representative
Asociación Renacer (asorenacer@yahoo.es) - Luis Carlos Fernández, legal representative
Asociación de Familias Desplazadas (ASOFADECOL) (luzmarinac59@yahoo.es) - Henry Rivera Acosta, legal representative
Asociación de Personas Desplazadas de Fonseca, ADESFONGUA - Eustacio Fonseca Barraza, legal representative.
For the Respondent:
Departamento Administrativo de la Presidencia de la República
Calle 7 No.6-54, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Ministerio de Hacienda y Crédito Público
Carrera 8 No. 6C- 38. Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Ministerios de Salud y del Trabajo y Seguridad Social (now Ministerio de Protección Social)
Carrera 13 No. 32-76 piso 1, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Avenida Jimenez N°. 7A - 17, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Calle 43 No. 57 - 14. Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Instituto Nacional de Vivienda de Interés Social y Reforma Urbana - INURBE
Instituto Colombiano de la Reforma Agraria - INCORA (now Agencia Nacional de Tierras – ANT)
Calle 43 N° 57 - 41. Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Amici curiae:
Calle 55 No. 10-32, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) – Francisco Galindo Vélez
Calle 71 N° 12-25, Bogotá D.C., Colombia
Case documents
Annex 1: summary of the tutela judgments reviewed in this proceeding (T-653010 and aggregated)
Annex 2: Summary of evidence provided by public entities and organisations. – Red de Solidaridad Social, Departamento Nacional de Planeación (DNP), Ministerio de Hacienda y Crédito Público, Ministerio de Educación Nacional, Ministerio de Protección Social, Instituto Nacional de Vivienda de Interés Social y Reforma Urbana (INURBE), Defensoría del Pueblo, Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR) y Secretariado Nacional de Pastoral Social de la Conferencia Episcopal de Colombia, Sección de Movilidad Humana.
Secondary documents
Jiménez Ocampo S and others, Internally Displaced People In Colombia, Victims In Permanent Transition: Ethical And Political Dilemas Of Reparative Justice In The Midst Of Internal Armed Conflict (Ediciones Antropos 2009) <https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r25217.pdf > accessed 1 March 2022
Ibáñez A, and Velásquez A, 'El Impacto Del Desplazamiento Forzoso En Colombia' (United Nations 2008) <https://www.cepal.org/sites/default/files/publication/files/6151/S0800725_es.pdf > accessed 1 March 2022
Niño Pavajeau J, 'Las Migraciones Forzadas De Población, Por La Violencia, En Colombia: Una Historia De Éxodos, Miedo, Terror, Y Pobreza' (1999) 33 Scripta Nova Revista Electrónica de Geografía y Ciencias Sociales <http://www.ub.edu/geocrit/sn-45-33.htm > accessed 1 March 2022
Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja (CICR) & Programa Mundial de Alimentos (PMA), 'Una Mirada A La Población Desplazada En Ocho Ciudades De Colombia: Respuesta Institucional Local, Condiciones De Vida Y Recomendaciones Para Su Atención' (CICR - PMA 2007) <https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/286A0FD67CBB8C41C125740A004EBDA3-Reporte_completo.pdf > accessed 1 March 2022