Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Access for All
Exhibit Hall
Hotels
WiFi
Search Tips
Annual Meeting App
Onsite Guide
In this paper, I examine the role of the Colombian Constitutional Court as an agent of development, using a case study which refers to rules regarding adjudication of vacant land (baldÃos) to peasants. After a legal reform in 2011, the rules to adjudicate vacant land were eased, such that land that was previously adjudicated to peasants could be sold to agribusiness companies, potentially favoring land concentration. These changes were challenged in court, on the grounds that it violated the rights of peasants to progressive access of land (as mandated by article 64 of the Constitution) and because it threatened food security and sovereignty (considering article 65 of the Constitution, which establishes that the production of food shall be especially protected by the State). The Court agreed with the plaintiffs and considered that the changes were regressive. I posit that this is an example of a court which decided between two clashing visions of development: one that is focused on economic growth through market-based reform, and another one which is inspired by a human rights approach. I discuss the implications of the ruling and explain how this puts into question views critical of the human-rights based approach to development as subsirvient to neoliberal interests.