E/CN.4/1995/111 page 32 105. While the institutional political structure is highly centralized, there are sizeable parts of the country where the central Government’s writ barely applies. This may be because the area is mainly controlled by insurgent forces or because, in the absence of a specific legal framework for the actions of the State’s own forces in the areas referred to as zonas rojas, these forces are accustomed to having a free hand. Further, elements of the security forces are commonly considered to have formed alliances with (if not to have been subverted or corrupted by) drug trafficking organizations and paramilitary groups, some of which the armed forces set up themselves. Alliances between drug trafficking organizations and insurgent groups were also reported. 106. Human rights violations are frequent in the context of operations of the security forces directed against the armed insurgency or drug traffickers. The Special Rapporteurs fully understand the difficulties faced by the Government when confronted with guerrillas and other armed groups, both responsible for numerous acts of violence and clearly lacking respect for the lives and physical integrity of state agents and civilians. However, this does not justify excessive and arbitrary use of force on the part of the security forces. There is no excuse for extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions or torture, nor for their perpetuation through impunity. 107. Yet, the impunity enjoyed by human rights violators in Colombia is almost total. The military judiciary claims, and generally obtains, competence to deal with cases involving security forces personnel accused of human rights violations. The military justice system can be tough and effective in prosecuting and punishing disciplinary offences involving manifest disobedience of orders. But it has proved itself equally effective in guaranteeing impunity for violations of the ordinary criminal law in respect of acts (murder, torture, kidnapping) committed in the line of duty. Thus, Colombia clearly fails to fulfil its obligation under international law to carry out exhaustive and impartial investigations with a view to identifying those responsible, bringing them to justice and punishing them. 34/ Although in a number of cases, administrative tribunals have granted compensation to victims or their families for damages suffered at the hands of state agents, the tribunals conducting criminal proceedings against the same agents do not find grounds for their conviction. This strongly suggests the lack of institutional willingness to hold the authors of human rights violations responsible. 108. Those in favour of military jurisdiction over human rights violations committed by members of the security forces have based their argument on the interpretation of acts committed "in connection with" military service, as contained in article 221 of the Constitution. The Special Rapporteurs wish to express their concern at the fact that the Constitution, which refers to respect for human dignity and human rights among its fundamental principles, is interpreted in a way that continues to allow for virtually total impunity. Furthermore, the fact that the members of the chamber of the Superior Council of the Judicature that decides in cases of conflict of competence are elected by Congress is not easily reconcilable with the fundamental principle of independence of the judiciary from the legislature.