Соответствующая норма
Colombia
Practice Relating to Rule 2. Violence Aimed at Spreading Terror among the Civilian Population
Colombia’s Basic Military Manual (1995) provides that the civilian population shall not be terrorized. 
Colombia, Derecho Internacional Humanitario – Manual Básico para las Personerías y las Fuerzas Armadas de Colombia, Ministerio de Defensa Nacional, 1995, p. 30.
Colombia’s Operational Law Manual (2009) states:
One of the main expressions of customary international humanitarian law are the fundamental guarantees. In this respect, the Constitutional Court listed the following as fundamental guarantees:
(2) The prohibition of actions the purpose of which is to cause terror among the civilian population. 
Colombia, Manual de Derecho Operacional Manual FF.MM. 3-41 Público, Primera Edición 2009, Comando General de las Fuerzas Militares, aprobado por el Comandante General de las Fuerzas Armadas por Disposición Número 056, 7 December 2009, pp. 36–37.
[footnote in original omitted])
The manual also states:
For its part, the [1977] Additional Protocol II to the [1949] Geneva Conventions adds to these prohibitions … acts of terrorism … . All these prohibitions, even if more specific [in Additional Protocol II], can also be derived from common article 3 [of the Geneva Conventions].” 
Colombia, Manual de Derecho Operacional Manual FF.MM. 3-41 Público, Primera Edición 2009, Comando General de las Fuerzas Militares, aprobado por el Comandante General de las Fuerzas Armadas por Disposición Número 056, 7 December 2009, p. 42.
[footnote in original omitted]
The manual further states:
IHL protects the civilian population and civilians. This is provided for in Article 13 of Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, according to which: “[1.] The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules shall be observed in all circumstances. [2.] The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited. [3.] Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Part, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities”. 
Colombia, Manual de Derecho Operacional Manual FF.MM. 3-41 Público, Primera Edición 2009, Comando General de las Fuerzas Militares, aprobado por el Comandante General de las Fuerzas Armadas por Disposición Número 056, 7 December 2009, p. 47.
Colombia’s Penal Code (2000) imposes a criminal sanction on “anyone who, during an armed conflict, carries out or orders the carrying out of … acts or threats of violence whose primary purpose is to terrorize the civilian population”. 
Colombia, Penal Code, 2000, Article 144.
In 2007, in the Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
The principle of distinction is complex and encompasses a number of treaty and customary norms applicable in internal armed conflicts, in addition to, in many cases, enjoying ius cogens status. These rules [include] … the prohibition to take actions the primary purpose of which is to cause terror among the civilian population. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, Judgment of 25 April 2007, pp. 84–86.
In 2010, in the El Iguano case, the Justice and Peace Chamber of Colombia’s High District Court of Bogotá convicted a member of the paramilitary group Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (United Self-Defence Forces of Colombia) of several crimes committed against the civilian population. The Court stated:
138. What really identified the criminal conduct of the Self-Defence Forces was committing every one of these offences with the maximum possible cruelty. The intention of these forces to generate terror among the population can be identified from the manner in which they entered the territories and made their presence constant. A “proof of the terror caused to the population, which was so strong that it led to the forced displacement of the population as far as Venezuela”, corresponds to the incursions in the town of La Gabarra (North of Santander), which resulted in approximately 27 inhabitants being executed. This incursion was preceded by a public announcement about “taking over la Gabarra in order to kill those persons who assist the guerrillas, whose names were listed”. Likewise, the accused … used to write threatening messages on the walls near the place where he murdered his victims, such as “we have arrived to stay, the war is just starting”, “guerrilla fighters: either you wear a uniform or you will die as a civilian”, “death to depraved people”, “death to [bandits]”.
213. In conclusion, the 170 deaths, the torture, the acts of terrorism, destruction of protected objects, forced displacement and extortions or arbitrary contributions addressed by this decision constitute grave violations of international humanitarian law. The law of Geneva prohibits these acts – except for the extortions and arbitrary contributions – and obliges the State to prevent, investigate and punish them. In this sense:
222. Acts of terrorism. Article 13(2) of the [1977] Additional Protocol II prohibits acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population.
223. According to international case law, [the prohibition of] this violation of the laws and customs of war, which apply in both internal and international armed conflicts, aims at protecting the civilian population as a whole or individual civilians who do not take part in hostilities from acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to cause terror or, in other words, “to create an atmosphere of extreme fear or uncertainty of being subjected to violence among the civilian population”.
224. The ICTY has highlighted the direct link between this prohibition and fundamental guarantees of special importance. According to the tribunal, in addition to being provided under the [1949] Geneva Conventions and their [1977] Additional Protocols, as well as under customary law:
[T]he exposure to terror is a denial of the fundamental right to security of person which is recognised in all national systems and is contained in Article 9 of the [1966] ICCPR and Article 5 of the [1950] ECHR.
225. The Chamber has already sufficiently explained that the purpose of creating a state of fear among the population was the primary motive of the Fronteras Front’s conduct …
227. In all the instances submitted to the jurisdiction of this Chamber, it has been identified that acts of terrorism as war crimes were committed. With regard to the criminal penalty, the facts committed before the entry into force of Law 599 of 2000 [Penal Code] will be punished as crimes of terrorism pursuant to article 187 of Decree Law No. 100 of 1980 [previous Penal Code of Colombia]. 
Colombia, High District Court of Bogotá, El Iguano case, Judgment, 2 December 2010, §§ 138, 213, 222–225 and 227.
[footnotes in original omitted]
In 2008, in its fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, Colombia stated:
76. In the absence of a culture of respect for fundamental rights, violence had been increasing since the mid-1980s and, in 2002, led the country to a problematic situation as a result of human rights violations committed by organized paramilitary armed groups and various criminal organizations.
77. In response to that situation, the Government incorporated in the National Development Plan for 2002-2006 a strategy aimed at preventing, reversing and mitigating the effects of violence on civilians, particularly in connection with such practices as forced displacement, terrorism against the population, use of anti-personnel mines and selective persecution of leaders. Much of that strategy has consisted in activities designed to disseminate and promote human rights and IHL and meet related international commitments. 
Colombia, Fourth periodic report to the Committee against Torture, 21 February 2008, UN Doc. CAT/C/COL/4, submitted 21 January 2008, §§ 76–77.