The article examines the limitations of the restitution of property rights approach, with its repercussions for on civil law, and its way of narrating the subject-owner and the thing-good appropriated, in order to address the experiences of harm suffered by displaced and dispossessed peasants in Colombia. Such narration reaffirms the separation between persons and things; reduces the significant potentiality of the relations between peasants and land; and limits the interpretive field of harm and reparation since the experiences of those harmed are not heard.
