 Very well. We'll be starting a conversation with General Oscar Naranjo Trujillo. I'd like to start off by commenting the following. When you hear that Oscar Naranjo has worked for practically two decades on police issues and security issues, for example, you in intelligence in Colombia, you were chief of police, and that would almost want to mean that you see a war against drug traffickers. You believe that will be a confrontation with organized crime, but in general, however, you greatly emphasize the need to humanize the security policy. Why is it necessary to think of the security of families and see the citizen security and public security not necessarily in terms of the gangsters that fall into jails? To put this statement in context, I'd like to tell you that it's tremendously negative to call public security policy a war if today Latin America includes violence and we've said what it reflects is a true humanitarian tragedy, an emergency, because of the number of violent deaths that take place in Latin America. These indicate that Latin America represents around 46% of violent deaths in the world, so the rate is inadmissible. We are 10%, 9% of the world population, and when we look into why that happens, we have different approaches that I only mentioned to generate debate. The point is that security policies entered into a crisis in Latin America and that crisis is associated in our opinion to an authoritarian view of security policy. We must recall that the continent marked by dictatorial regimes took the citizenry to think that security was an authoritarian issue and so the society did not see security as a democratic value. Secondly, different concepts of public security gave privilege to national security, state security, but not public security or citizen security, which actually represent the rationale for its existence, because it's the life and values and security of the citizen. Security policy was understood only as a way of combating organized crime and in particular drug trafficking. It meant that in recent times there was even discussion of having heart stances in security. When you speak of heart stances in security, you forget whoever makes that statement that the hardest thing a policeman has in his hand is a weapon and what he's being told is, use your weapon. When they say that, don't enforce the law, use your weapon. So when we get to this issue of drugs with a lot of contingent from the U.S. statement by President Nixon that decreed the war on drugs, this became a formula to combat that phenomenon. What's been made evident is that the view of an integrated view of the policy and in general not involving society to make security its own in terms of its being a democratic value. What's happening in general? Latin Americans have lived the past 10 to 12 years with very good tailwind economically and unparalleled economic growth and countries of Brazil have seen a reduction of poverty. However, their violence has greatly heightened. We are the most violent region of the world. We have more than 40% of the violent deaths in the world. The spiral of violence in Central America, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil and very complicated issues also arise in Chile, Uruguay. The common types of crime increase greatly as well. How can we explain this growth of violence and being the only region where homicide, violent homicides continue to grow? I think we're paying the cost of having believed arbitrarily that poverty equaled crime. In Latin America there was sociological and political thesis that tried to explain violence and crime from the standpoint of poverty. Two very big mistakes were made. The poor were equaled with criminals. And secondly, we didn't look at reality. And the reality is that violence in Latin America is associated to criminal economies that marked, established marked differences in processes of social inclusion. We're paying the cost of having had public policy and not really having realized that public policy should achieve social inclusion because poverty does not create violence, but social exclusion does. On the other hand, we're paying the cost of not protecting formal economies but this World Economic Forum. I'd like to repeat this with great emphasis. In Latin America when we give ourselves license to admit an informal economy and informal employment, what we're doing is we're not protecting the formal economy that should be the one to be strengthened to leave those criminal economies and delinquency out of the field. We in Latin America and countries, let us say, of levels such as the DF in Mexico competitive on a world level with a very important offer and supply in many spheres but you transfer it to other Latin American cities a little less splendorous you find a common denominator and that's called public informality. There is nothing more democratic than public space and when a society, a country, allow the public space to be appropriated by informal activities you start up criminality. It's very hard to say this but I have not been an entrepreneur. I don't come from the economic sphere. I'm just a public official and I'm terrified to see how some governments some states have incorporated the statistics into their statistics informal employment. What we're saying is that someone on the street invading public space who pays no taxes, who competes with the formally organized companies we actually record their existence and include it in the statistics instead of making an effort to incorporate them to the formal economy and they appropriate the public space in fact it would seem minimal but public space in Latin America has been taken over by that informality and on that basis on that ground crime grows. There's been a lot of growth in Latin America but let us think about the quality of growth. For example we see what happens in northeast Brazil where there are urban eruptions that are very disorderly and we see there that crime criminality and murders, homicides generate great impunity. There is a lack of institutional capacity in my view. It seems to me that here we have an issue of policemen, judges, jails and prevention. Are the Latin American states at the level to grapple with all this? What's happened in Latin America? Well this asymmetry Raphael of an economic entrepreneurial world that grows in Latin America versus such an incapacity on the part of the institutions makes evident the following. For as long as entrepreneurial leadership took over its formation, its global development involving values and principles and concepts of social responsibility the states decreased and abandoned the need to grow professionally. A common denominator in Latin America is we do not have a professional bureaucracy. It's a tremendously mobile bureaucracy that goes from government to government because there's no state policy. There are institutions like the police forces which are true enterprises. When we see a police force of the size of the Colombian force, 170,000 individuals with 150 helicopters administering 45,000 vehicles, 70,000 radios, 60,000 computers, what you have before you is an entrepreneurial challenge in terms of managing it because the Colombian police is above the average of Latin American police forces because it learned to manage itself and it did it together with entrepreneurs. If we have a message for this forum, it's that entrepreneurs have a lot to transfer in knowledge and good administration practices to the state institutions and there an opening stance and a stance of commitment on the part of entrepreneurs could make the difference. Thank you for your reply, General. You know we've discussed this with Marisol. There is a possibility for us to set up a council or a task force for Latin Americans not only Latin Americans but with other parts of the world that the web could perhaps think with us what can we do in this field in Latin America because the topic of entrepreneurs, it seems to me in Latin America they've done three things. One is hide from insecurity when they put up all these bars around their houses. Secondly, they left the business and stopped investing. Or thirdly, they would say let us create a voice for entrepreneurs, take a know-how, an entrepreneurial quality to the government sector. So let us talk about this because we must do things here at the World Economic Forum. It's a very urgent problem for Latin America. I would say that the entrepreneurs in Latin America are a victim of a kind of logical trap. It's led to what you just said, the logic of investing enormous budgets in private security and actually when you see what the entrepreneurs in Latin America invest in security the figures are above the institutional and state budgets. There is an imbalance where I would say entrepreneurs are victims of the inability and lack of attention on the part of the state. Functionals straightening out of things would have to do with money transferred from private security or better invested directly to finance public security. I bring to this forum the Colombian experience with the net worth tax on large taxpayers. They pay an additional security tax. They've been paying it for about two years and when we resorted to that it was supposed to be for only once for a single time they would pay that tax. But the entrepreneurs discovered that their taxes invested in security started to transform institutions and now we pay taxes naturally and practically and it involves an additional element. It provides entrepreneurs a real possibility to ask for accountability that institutions be accountable about the transparent implementation of their budgets. You're no longer a Colombian. You're a Latin American. You're Mexican. You're Salvadoran. I know that it's a fact you're traveling all over around Latin America and as chief of intelligence you've been on tours and you've told Mexico you told El Salvador about 10-15 years ago be careful because we're suffering a lot in Colombia the strengthening of criminality at an international level. How do you see international cooperation in Latin America? Organized crime is transnational it's evident isn't there a cockroach effect now where we press here and the cockroach springs into the house next door. It's happened a lot in Latin America. We had the problem in Mexico and then we saw the appearance of CETAS the terrible Central American Organization. So how can we cooperate on this urgent topic? Here I have another entrepreneurial example for you. This man is probably up in the moon you'll say and he wants to continue to be invited to the forum but I would say that for as long as entrepreneurs concern themselves with identifying the nature of a globalized world and make it practical make its ex their entrepreneurial exercises practically in a world with free trade treaties, flow of capital etc. transboundary flows at the state level we're still defending the old concepts of sovereignty and it's incredible that in Europe with all the different cultures and languages they have a view a practical and view of what sovereignty means in a globalized world. Today in Latin America if you catch a criminal who is a transnational criminal if you catch him outside his own territory to request the action of justice you must get very complexes, extradition processes underway and extraditing a national in Latin America bears a very high political burden. Why should we send him to be judged by another country? This is my competence in my country. That mentality of old-fashioned sovereignty which understood that each national government was a kind of self-sufficient island is what prevails in the concepts of security in Latin America. We have to rethink the sovereignty statutes and at least realize that we have a mobile transnational criminality before us that means simultaneous and joint action. In Latin America I would say the topic of deep penalizing drugs has become fashionable. First ex-president Cardoso Gaviglia Sevilla talked about it now. Presidents in office President Santos Perin Polina are talking about this. The OES is about to entrust a group with a study and we see in Latin America that's talking of deep criminalizing drugs to find other market solutions. We see many legislators in our countries at all levels local and national passing legislation on hard action in Brazil. Now they are lowering the age at which people can be processed as criminals. Is there a way of combating effectively this organized crime aspect in the situation in Latin America or rather the ones faced by humanity in regard to drug use generates the need for a debate to have a more integrated overview and to overcome the efficiency status of policies that developed in the past 70 years. But just as I say debate is necessary and dialogue is necessary it shouldn't just be dialogue concerning deep criminalizing or legalizing drugs. Actually these should be the final issues in that debate but not the entry point for the debate. On the other hand I think there are many types of confusion, many myths to want to deal with the drug problem as if it were a single drug when the observatory in Europe speaks of more than 400 substances consumed only in Europe in the past few years so we would have to have a serious debate we'd have to look at things drug by drug and I think we also have some populism at the two ends of those who speak of decriminalizing or and that is that we're not being aware of the reality the criminal economy will always be there if the states are not more capable in these terms and then we have a great complication when you see problems of public security in Latin America the sectors of policies promoting perpetual imprisonment or death penalty and the question is if the average of impunity in Latin America is 82% who are you going to apply this to the 18% that's truly processed and judged to have judicial populism by increasing penalties by decreasing the age at which people can be accused giving a 14 year old the same treatment as you give a 25 year old criminal this is giving up the ethical stance of a state that cannot criminalize a child but we are going along that avenue from the other standpoint so I think this discussion requires a great dose of humility because normally discussions are among experts, political or academic leaders and scientists and actually the voice of communities at least I don't hear it as part of the dialogue if you go to communities you see the anguish of a mother who has an addict for a son and also the examples that we see in the life of youth with the epidemic and endemic propagation of drugs I think a debate coming up from the grassroots of society from citizens would provide the avenues for solution of this President Obama will be in Mexico and Costa Rica next week if Obama were Santa Claus let's say and we could ask him for one thing to solve the insecurity problems of Latin America what would you ask for maybe that's something that can be debated for a long time I know it creates polarities of stances but I will mention my position however I think that arming citizens is actually creating conditions for violence to increase when you see the arms industry selling weapons to citizens you are creating an opportunity for chaos what's been proven is that states having the monopoly of force and guaranteeing the legitimate use of weapons are societies that have been able to decrease the rates of violent death to one digit case of Europe when there are societies that under the other doctrine believe that state and society are defended when each citizen is armed the indicators of violence grow so I would ask President Obama you've made a public announcement on the basis of a tragedy the Sandy Hook tragedy that shook the whole nation and that massacre every three or four weeks there are collective murders in societies there is a society that is permissive towards having weapons let us give that arms industry not deliver weapons to citizens to private citizens and in Latin America that we have a commitment, a structural commitment on the part of US agencies to combat the arms traffickers just to mention the Andean region the Andean region in the past two years more than 10,000 assault rifles have been captured and when you ask who is responsible on the other side that's been judged or processed by legislation there is no name there is no mention the bands of arms traffickers are intact and those would have to be neutralized President Obama please take away weapons at least from the Latin American market I don't see this problem as being so serious in our region in Uruguay, not to mention Mexico, in your country we are truly seen in unsafe and insecure Latin America and I'm the idea that the decade of the 70s, the 80s when we had the problem of the foreign debt Latin America did not have this common challenge it's a Latin American challenge not Mexican, Colombian, Salvadoran and that's why we think that as in the 70s we created great schools of economics and educated great economists in Latin America now we would have to educate and create oscars naranjos for Mexico, for Central America and effective matters that officials those that are in charge of security do not have that preparation so what can you say, how can we create these oscars naranjos, police, officials, officers with good criteria that can understand that this is a matter of humanitarian matter and that in the end the individual, the human being is what we're inhibiting in Latin America with this wave of insecurity is the human being what would be your answer? I think that the policy politics in the past have been framed by an artificial type of image we're not concerned with safety, with security because the dilemma that we face as politicians is that either you invest in social matters or in political matters and investing in social without safety means what it has meant there's been a lack of growth and values in living together unity and safety and this dichotomy starts to disappear today but it's disappeared and it has put in evidence since we're not concerned in that matter through politics when we rebuild this map of the politically responsible for this reality we can have great surprises you can find secretaries of public safety of a government or of a state or a person that comes from, you find there a person that comes from the field of veterinary or that is a member or an academic that simply performs studies on violence why do I bring this up? because deficit, as you have just said what it says is that it is necessary from the academia, from politics to have a combination of efforts so that we can prepare a policy that can understand public safety and collective living and if we transform police, the police entity but it doesn't land on positive, on productive results then we will have no results to include these matters of safety and we have to do this under the expertise offered by science, experience and community participation which is what truly teaches us how to address these problems and in general well I'm being told that we've run out of time time flies here but I wanted to comment on this father, so Aline is here you're an expert in security and in Mexico evidently we have not been able to protect migrants in transit so to speak, what would you say? what can we do there? because there's an enormous flow we're talking about approximately last year we calculated between 70,000, 80,000 migrants in transit Central Americans that tried to use Mexico to reach the US so what do you say about that? well I think that the world is in deficit with a conceptualization regarding global citizenship that is today in the statute of citizenship we understand ourselves as citizens and we're part of a national state but when I transit, when I move I displace myself towards another national state I'm not a global citizen with full rights the world should refresh that idea of a global citizen in a globalized world and provide him or her with full rights regardless of the state in which here she is in now in the Mexican state I would say that there's going to be a very strong trial judgment by society against all of us and for example every day, being here we are aware and we know that a train is moving from south to north a train that is called the beast and it's the convergence point of a human that result in rapes, death, violations kidnappings, trafficking of any type and we don't do anything I would say that history is going to be very hard on us and therefore to put a police well not a police movement in place which is what comes to mind to contain that strategy is to see how we can have that universe that human capital that does not find a sense of a life project for existence it doesn't really matter if they settle in Guatemala, Belize, Mexico, United States, Canada and the end he starts being an individual that is included in a political and social project and finally migration is an extreme result of social exclusion when I migrate and I do it under those conditions it's because I see that I've been socially excluded I think this is not a police matter it's not a matter that has this is fundamentally a matter of social inclusion well the term humility apparently Latin Americans have to be more humble and realize and understand that we have a problem that is multi-dimensional and that we truly have to do teamwork we have to work as a team and finally entrepreneurs, social leaders have a lot to contribute to the state that by the way should be the main stakeholder in this struggle to achieve a safer Latin America so thank you very much General