PERU: Impunity a Hot-Button Issue in the Scramble for Votes

By Ángel Páez Reprint | | Print |

Ángel Páez

LIMA, Jan 6 2006 (IPS) - For the first time ever, members of the armed forces and police will be able to vote in elections in Peru, next April. These 150,000 newly enfranchised voters are attracting special attention from the candidates, which has given rise to fears that those accused of violating human rights may stand a better chance of escaping justice.

The leading candidates for the presidency and Congress in Peru have begun to call for an amnesty for soldiers who took part in the “war against terrorism,” a term applied to the repression by state security forces of Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA) insurgents in the 1980s and 1990s.

The rush to win the votes of servicemen, police and their families began in the wake of speeches by the new army chief, General César Reinoso, and the even newer head of the joint chiefs of staff, General José Williams, who complained about what they considered to be “shameful persecution” of those who participated in operations against Shining Path and the MRTA.

Williams himself is facing two different trials for human rights violations committed during the “dirty war”.

The last amnesty law for military personnel and police accused of extrajudicial executions, kidnappings and torture was passed in 1995 at the initiative of then president Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000). It rendered void all sentences and all trials then under way against uniformed torturers and murderers.

According to analysts, the law was drawn up by Vladimir Montesinos, Fujimori’s security chief, at the request of members of the “Colina Group” death squad, who had been sentenced to 25 years in prison by a military tribunal.

The convicts demanded to be released, threatening to otherwise inform the press that they had simply been carrying out the orders of Fujimori, Montesinos and the military top brass.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights condemned the amnesty law, but it was unable to prevent the release of military personnel and police accused of crimes against humanity.

Lourdes Flores, the conservative presidential candidate who heads the opinion polls, originally opposed the amnesty but is now proposing selective pardons for members of the military and police “subjected to unfair trials.”

“I will always defend those who defended us,” Flores declared, referring directly to the 352 members of the armed forces who are facing trial for crimes perpetrated during the counter- insurgency struggle. Evidence of their crimes was collected by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which documented 47 serious cases in 2003.

The president of the Constitutional Court, Víctor García, and People’s Defender (ombudswoman) Beatriz Merino have reminded the candidates that an amnesty, pardon or any other means of repealing sentences or cancelling trials against human rights violators are unacceptable from every point of view.

“They simply cannot be applied in cases of human rights violations,” García said.

For her part, Merino said that “Only a judge can decide whether a soldier or police officer is innocent or guilty.”

But Flores is not alone. Retired army colonel Ollanta Humala, a nationalistic, pro-indigenous candidate, has promised an amnesty for his former comrades-in-arms and police who have been sentenced or are being tried for atrocities committed during the so-called “war against terrorism” (1980-2000).

Humala has become popular among grassroots sectors tired of the traditional politicians and parties, and he unexpectedly catapulted to second place in the polls.

“I fought against terrorism and I saw a lot of my comrades-in-arms fall. Now, many of those who defended the country are being judged as criminals. This must stop,” he asserted.

Meanwhile, the third contender in the elections, former president Alan García (1985-1990), supports a proposed review of the cases of military personnel who may be facing “unfair trials.”

As an example, he mentioned the members of the “Chavín de Huantar” commando unit who on Apr. 22, 1997 carried out a bloody raid to free hostages held by the MRTA in the Japanese ambassador’s residence in Lima, killing all 14 guerrillas in the building.

Judicial authorities have established that at least eight of the rebels killed in the hostage rescue operation were executed by point-blank shots to the head after surrendering.

García is particularly supportive of the security forces involved in the case because his running-mate for first vice president, former admiral Luis Giampetri, was one of the hostages and cooperated with the commandos to pull off the operation.

Furthermore, Giampetri openly challenges the Truth Commission and non-governmental organisations that defend human rights.

President Alejandro Toledo has refused to grant amnesty to uniformed criminals. But now the governing party candidates, desperate to capitalise on the military vote, are saying they will annul trials of military personnel and police officers.

Rafael Belaúnde, the ruling party presidential candidate, declared that “amnesty is a just aspiration for those who fought and risked their lives in the war against those who tried to destroy the country by fire and sword.”

Legislator Luis Iberico, vice presidential candidate for the Independent Moralising Front (FIM), which was formerly allied to the Toledo administration, announced that he would present a draft amnesty law.

“My proposal isn’t an amnesty for those who dishonoured their uniform by committing excesses, but for those who fought terrorism,” he said. “The wheat must be separated from the chaff. And the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has no business with this,” he added emphatically.

Iberico further announced that he will seek an investigation of non-governmental human rights organisations “that have acted as judge and jury in trials of military personnel.”

In their attempt to win favour with servicemen and police, the main candidates have joined in the criticism of human rights groups.

The Office of the People’s Defender (ombudsman’s office) said that 32 servicemen have attempted to avoid penalties for human rights violations by asking that their cases be dismissed.

So far, judges have rejected 22 of these appeals and the rest are pending. The courts refused the requests because of an injunction by the Inter-American Court, based in San José, Costa Rica.

Amid the rush to draw the votes of the 150,000 uniformed personnel, the only ones who have not been listened to are the victims of human rights violations and their families.