THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GROWING UP IN ARMED CONFLICT

Despite the consensus on the prohibition of child recruitment, represented mainly in its character of war crime, it is not clear if those who reach the age of majority inside an armed group are subjects of special protection, or if they should be held accountable before criminal justice for the crimes they have committed, and the scope of this responsibility is unclear as well. Within the International Criminal Court, double standards are evident when, on the one hand, it condemns Thomas Lubanga only for child recruitment, but on the other, fully judges Dominic Ongwen for the crimes committed as an adult, without considering his early recruitment.

Similarly, in the Colombian scenario there are positions for and against such responsibility. However, the justice system has opted for eventual liability for crimes committed during the age of minority but full responsibility for those committed while adults. Thus, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace faces a scenario in which it must reconcile contradictory arguments and make an effective use of its unique characteristics effectively to accomplish true justice for all the victims of the Colombian armed conflict.