This article reviews critically the work and results of the Justice and Peace
Division at the Colombian Attorney General's office. To do this, the article
resorts to comparative law to examine the way in which complex system crimes
have been investigated and prosecuted in contexts of transitional justice. The
article describes the opinions of those who defend a maximalist approach
towards those investigations and prosecutions. According to the maximalist
position, the totality of crimes and authors must be prosecuted and tried in
the framework of the Colombian Justice and Peace Act of 2005.
The text discusses these opinions critically due to the difficulties that such
strategy would involve. Finally the article concludes by showing how a less
ambitious and more pragmatic approach would be clearly superior in the
Colombian case. Justice and Peace investigations must concentrate in the
fundamental patterns of the system crimes committed; the State should
employ reasonable strategies for prioritizing and taking to trial the gravest
cases and/or the highest responsible persons. This approach would be much
more conductive to reaching the goals of truth, justice, reparation, and no
repetition contained in the Law.