The pursuit of lasting peace in Santiago de Cali has hit a critical point of contention within the city’s legislative body. Recent discussions at the Concejo de Cali have highlighted a significant gap in the current peace policy, with officials arguing that the strategy fails to integrate essential social pillars necessary for territorial stability.
At the heart of the debate is the omission of key institutional actors. Specifically, concerns have been raised that the peace policy does not include the education sector or the Secretaría de Desarrollo Territorial y Participación Ciudadana, both of which are viewed as indispensable for implementing effective interventions within the city’s diverse territories.
This institutional oversight comes at a time when the city is grappling with severe security challenges. The Concejo has recently been forced to address alarming homicide rates affecting the youth population, leading to proposals for sectorized and focused curfews to curb violence.
The tension between security-led mandates and social-led peacebuilding is now center stage. While the administration focuses on political control and security measures, legislators argue that without the involvement of education and community participation, the “peace” being pursued is incomplete and lacks the grassroots infrastructure required for sustainability.
The Critical Role of Territorial Participation and Education
The Secretaría de Desarrollo Territorial y Participación Ciudadana is designed to be the bridge between the municipal government and the citizens. Led by Secretary of Dispatch Maritza Aponzá Zapata, a social community psychologist, the office is tasked with managing the city’s relationship with its neighborhoods and ensuring that citizens have a voice in governance .
By excluding this body from the peace policy, critics argue that the city is ignoring the very mechanisms—such as the Centros de Administración Local Integrada (CALI)—that allow for localized administration and community engagement. These centers, managed by officials like Alfredo Vargas Rebolledo (CALI 4) and Catherine Castaño López (CALI 19), serve as the primary points of contact for residents in underserved areas.
Similarly, the absence of the education sector from the peace framework is seen as a strategic failure. Education is widely regarded as the primary tool for preventing youth recruitment into criminal gangs and providing alternative pathways for at-risk populations. Without a formalized link between peace policies and educational initiatives, the city risks treating the symptoms of violence through security measures without addressing the root causes of instability.
Security Crisis and the Demand for Clear Resources
The debate over the peace policy is unfolding against a backdrop of rising violence. On April 8, 2026, reports surfaced regarding a reconciliation and peace policy for Cali that demands “clear resources” to effectively confront the ongoing violence .
The urgency is driven by data showing that homicide targets have exceeded the goals set in the city’s development plan. This failure has led council members to express strong reservations about the current security policy, prompting calls for more aggressive and localized interventions, including the aforementioned sectorized curfews for youth.
The disconnect is evident: while the city’s security apparatus focuses on “political control” and police coordination—such as the invitation of the Metropolitan Police Commander to plenary sessions—the social infrastructure required to maintain that peace is being sidelined. The argument from the Concejo is that security can stop violence in the short term, but only education and territorial participation can prevent its return.
Key Institutional Stakeholders in Cali’s Social Infrastructure
| Official | Role/Cargo | Focus Area |
|---|---|---|
| Maritza Aponzá Zapata | Secretaria de Despacho | Overall Territorial Development and Citizen Participation |
| Carolina Ordoñez Cedeño | Subsecretaria de Promoción y Fortalecimiento | Strengthening Citizen Participation |
| Catherine Castaño López | Jefe de Oficina (CALI 19) | Local Integrated Administration (El Cedro) |
| Alfredo Vargas Rebolledo | Jefe de Oficina (CALI 4) | Local Integrated Administration |
What So for the Community
For the residents of Cali, the exclusion of social agencies from peace policies means that the “peace” being implemented may feel more like a military or police presence than a community-led transformation. When the Secretaría de Desarrollo Territorial y Participación Ciudadana is left out, the mechanisms for citizen feedback and local leadership are weakened.
The impact is most felt in the “territories”—the specific neighborhoods where violence is most concentrated. In these areas, a peace policy that only includes security forces without the support of educators and community organizers often fails to gain the trust of the population. This lack of trust can hinder the success of reconciliation efforts and make the implementation of peace agreements more difficult.
the lack of a coordinated educational strategy within the peace framework means that youth in high-violence sectors may not have access to the social services or academic support necessary to transition away from criminal environments, effectively leaving them vulnerable despite the presence of increased security.
Next Steps and Official Checkpoints
The discourse surrounding the peace policy is expected to continue as the Concejo de Cali evaluates the effectiveness of current security measures and the necessity of incorporating social agencies. The immediate focus remains on the “Control Político” sessions, where the Secretaría de Seguridad y Justicia and the Metropolitan Police are being held accountable for the city’s homicide rates .
The next critical checkpoint will be the ongoing review of the peace and reconciliation policy to determine if and how the education sector and the Secretaría de Desarrollo Territorial y Participación Ciudadana will be integrated to ensure a more holistic approach to urban stability.
We invite our readers to share their perspectives on the balance between security and social investment in urban peace-building in the comments section below.