I don't know that particular study, but I certainly do share those concerns. We have said all along that the reason we need to have a human rights impact assessment is to understand those sorts of concerns and then make decisions as to whether it could be possible. Be it in the context of Colombia or some other country, the concerns are so deeply entrenched in the systems of governance in the country, etc., that at this time there is no possible way to go forward with the proposed free trade deal in a way that would adequately safeguard let alone not worsen the human rights situation.
It may also be that the impact assessment would highlight the concerns you've pointed to but also make some recommendations: given those concerns about ways in which investment might fuel the conflict, here are the sorts of oversight and monitoring mechanisms that need to be put in place, here's a different approach to how royalties and revenues being generated by that investment should be dealt with, the kind of transparency we need to see with respect to those moneys, and if that is all in place, investment can go ahead in a way that will be good for the economy, good for social progress, and also good for human rights. That's what the human rights impact assessment teaches us.