Dilemmas and alternative understandings from the collective struggle of the Tribunal Popular in Siloé.
Disponible en español:
coproduction, emotions, human rights, popular justice, state violence
By means of a dialogue, this entry discusses the different and contested meanings of justice and how they are transformed when justice is thought of as a collective and popular praxis. We emphasise the place of emotions in the conceptualisation of justice. In other words, justice from the people as a collective practice that operates at multiple scales and involves multiple knowledges and emotions.

Right: "If the wounding is systemic, the healing will be collective. Siloé resists."
The Tribunal Popular in Siloé is a collective effort for alternative and popular justice, formed by victims and survivors of police violence, their relatives, and allied human rights organisations and activists. It was born in response to state repression in the neighbourhoods of Cali’s Community 20, also known as Siloé, during the National Social Uprising of 2021 in Cali, Colombia. The tribunal responds to the need for clarification, truth and justice, comprehensive reparation and non-repetition for those who suffered police and state violence.
The Tribunal Popular in Siloé, along with 14 international judges, held three hearings—an inauguration, an indictment, and a judgment and sentencing. These hearings relied on testimonies as well as documentary and audiovisual evidence to establish that the events during the 2021 Social Uprising in Community 20 constituted “a continuing genocide against the youth.” While the verdict and sentence are symbolic, they have become powerful tools to demand justice from the state and judicial authorities.
Furthermore, the Tribunal Popular in Siloé allows people to meet and come together as a way to alleviate grief and generate social and territorial advocacy. As part of this effort, the tribunal holds monthly gatherings on the first Saturday of each month to conduct remembrance activities and promote advocacy for social and territorial justice.
IG @TribunalPopularEnSiloe
X @TribunalSiloe
FB: Tribunal de Siloé tribunalpopularsiloe@gmail.com
Tribunal Popular en Siloé
Cali, Colombia
tribunalpopularsiloe@gmail.com
Universidad del Valle – Tribunal Popular en Siloé
Cali, Colombia
jose.b.garzon@correounivalle.edu.co
Universidad de Pittsburgh – Tribunal Popular en Siloé
Pittsburgh, Estados Unidos
anamarrugo@pitt.edu
Tribunal Popular en Siloé
Cali, Colombia
perezmaritalia@gmail.com
Tribunal Popular en Siloé
Cali, Colombia
sara.vasquez@correounivalle.edu.co
Upcoming
Classic Approaches to Security
Traditionally, only states were actors of security in security research. This meant that states were seen as the ones who act and who were capable of performing security in the international arena, at least in the eyes of International Relations canon and particularly in terms of military security (Morgenthau, 1954Morgenthau, Hans Joachim. 1954. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. Knopf.; Waltz, 2001Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 2001. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. Columbia University Press., 2010Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 2010. Theory of International Politics. Waveland Press.). However, after the end of the Cold War and the subsequent widening of the security agenda, new research laid more emphasis on the social construction of security (Katzenstein, 1996Katzenstein, Peter J. 1996. The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York (etc.): Columbia University press.), and since the development of these new approaches to security the field has made substantial progress in understanding, conceptualising and utilising empirical and conceptual insights in the dynamics of producing, ordering and maintaining security within and beyond the state’s framework. These further developments range from security communities (Adler & Barnett, 1996Adler, Emanuel, und Michael N. Barnett. 1996. „Governing Anarchy: A Research Agenda for the Study of Security Communities“. Ethics & International Affairs 10 (März):63–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.1996.tb00004.x., 2008Adler, Emanuel, und Michael N. Barnett. 2008. Security Communities. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press.) to the various constructions, controversies and (re-)negotiation of security and order in public-private relations (Abrahamsen & Williams, 2009Abrahamsen, Rita, und Michael C. Williams. 2009. „Security Beyond the State: Global Security Assemblages in International Politics“. International Political Sociology 3 (1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-5687.2008.00060.x., 2010Abrahamsen, Rita, und Michael C. Williams. 2010. Security Beyond the State: Private Security in International Politics. Cambridge University Press.) and hybrid security governance (Schröder, Chappuis, & Kocak, 2014Schröder, Ursula C., Fairlie Chappuis, und Deniz Kocak. 2014. „Security Sector Reform and the Emergence of Hybrid Security Governance“. International Peacekeeping 21 (2): 214–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13533312.2014.910405.).
How to cite this entry:
Ketzmerick-Calandrino 2024: “Security. Speaking with Fanon?”. Virtual Encyclopaedia – Rewriting Peace and Conflict. 08.10.2024. https://rewritingpeaceandconflict.net/security-speaking-with-fanon/.
This entry is a result of the joint call for contributions with the Latin American Council for Social Sciences (CLACSO).

More on the subject
Video-Interview
Dr. Cecilia Roa in Dialogue
Podcast
Layla Brown and Filiberto Penados in conversation with Fabricio Rodríguez and Viviana García Pinzón