{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01810699588477366, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006584362139917695, 'mean_word_length': 5.1725888324873095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Post-Conflict Land Restitution: The German Experience in Relation to Colombian Law 1448 of 2011

This article compares the legal regimes of land restitution that were enacted in Germany, after World War II and again after the Cold War, with those enacted in Colombia after a decades-long armed conflict, in which many people lost their land. Many parallels can be drawn between these experiences: both countries decided to restitute land in an effective manner but also excluded groups of victims - which was accepted by both countries’ constitutional courts. Important differences emerge regarding the function of restitution for the resolution of the conflict and in its implementation in practice. These differences are owed to the different origins and causes of the conflicts, and to different circumstances prevailing at the time of restitution. It can be clearly shown that post-conflict restitution of land is very context-sensitive. Neither in Germany nor in Colombia were the objectives of the restitution regimes, individual justice and further policy aims, fully achieved. Nevertheless, the considerable extent to which justice was indeed attained by restitution should not be talked down or diminished.