Salvadoran Court Refuses to Detain Five Officers

According to the AP, the Salvadoran Supreme Court of Justice has refused to detain five former military officers allegedly involved in the murders of the Jesuits in 1989. From the looks of it, the judges based their decision upon the same reasoning that led them to "release" nine officers in August.

A court spokesman said Friday the five men could not be detained because it has not received a formal extradition request from Spain.

Another roadblock, but not the end of the story.

Civil War Crimes in Guatemala and El Salvador

Spanish Judge Eloy Velasco recently issued new "red alerts" against five former Salvadoran soldiers implicated in the murders of the Jesuits martyrs at the UCA in November 1989. The alerts were issued for the following individuals: 

Guillermo Alfredo Benavides Moreno (Army colonel and director of the Military Academy), Joaquín Arnoldo Cerna Flores (colonel and head of the Joint Three of the Joint Chiefs of the Armed Forces), Hector Ulises Cuenca Ocampo (Lt. Armed Forces stationed in the National Intelligence Agency of El Salvador).

They are also defendants Carlos Mauricio Guzman Aguilar (colonel and director of the National Intelligence Agency of El Salvador, DNI), and Oscar Alberto León Linares (Colonel and commander of Battalion Atlacatl).

Last month, the Salvadoran Supreme Court ruled that the government had met its legal responsibility by locating the nine soldiers for whom red alerts had been issued and that they were under no requirement to arrest the individuals. They were also within their own rights not to extradite the suspects because the judge’s request had not been properly forwarded to government officials.

While I can't say that I entirely bought the Supreme Court’s arguments, I figured that its ruling was only a beginning. People shouldn’t have gotten too worked up about the ruling and should instead let the legal process play out (that is, those who weren't actually pushing the case forward). Spanish authorities would in all likelihood alter their request in order to satisfy Salvadoran concerns. Once they had done that, the ball would be back in El Salvador's court. That sure seems to be where we are right now.

In neighboring Guatemala, a judge had been expected to rule Wednesday on whether former General Hector Mario Lopez Fuentes should stand trial for genocide in connection with ~300 massacres committed during Guatemala's civil war. A genocide case would be the first of its kind in Guatemala and the Americas. López Fuentes served as chief of staff of the Guatemalan military under president General Efrain Rios Montth between 1982 and 1983. 

Unfortunately, today’s expected decision was suspended "due to an administrative failure to transfer a file from the Appellate Court to the presiding judge." The judge is now scheduled to rule October 3rd. While this might be a legitimate reason, it is in no way going to reduce concerns that the court is simply acting to protect one of the men most responsible for designing and executing the government’s early 1980s scorched earth program. 

Finally in a third case, the Guatemalan Office of Human Rights submitted its case against Pedro Pimentel Rios for his alleged involvement in the 1982 Dos Erres massacre. Like the four ex-kaibiles convicted in August, the Public Prosecutor's office believes that Rios was a member of an "assault group who killed, tortured and raped in Las Dos Erres." Rios was arrested on immigration charges in the United States and subsequently deported to Guatemala in July.

While all three cases deserve their day in court, I am really interested in both the Jesuits' case and the genocide case. Those involved are some of those most responsible for the design and execution of the dirty wars launched out against the guerrillas and their civilian supporters and anyone else who dared speak out against the repressive regimes in El Salvador and Guatemala.

Jesuit Murder Suspects "Released"

Inocente Orlando Montano, a former colonel and vice minister of public security in El Salvador, was arrested on immigration charges Tuesday in Boston, MA. On Wednesday, a judge agreed to release him on $50,000 bail. He will now wear an ankle bracelet and live with his sister in Saugus while he fights the immigration charges. According to his lawyer, the 69-year old Montano is recovering from bladder cancer and an infection. He has also been working since 2003 and living in Everett, MA with his wife. 

It's not that unreasonable to release Montano while he fights the charges. While alleged to have done much more, at this time he's only accused of having lied on immigration forms. However, 

Federal prosecutor John Capin said in court Tuesday that Montano left Massachusetts late last week, apparently intending to make his way back to El Salvador through Mexico, but was intercepted by federal agents in Virginia.

That sure makes it sound like he’s a flight risk. It’s probably why he’s wearing an ankle bracelet. But it gives you a good idea what he thinks his chances of being extradited from El Salvador are. And maybe he's right.

The news out of El Salvador this evening is that Supreme Court has refused to order the detention of nine men accused, along with Montano, of having been involved in the massacre of six Jesuit priests, their house keeper and her daughter at the University of Central in San Salvador in November 1989. The nine men had turned themselves in last week.

The court said it would consider an extradition request if one was received. But at present all that is pending against the men in El Salvador is an Interpol request that they be located, something that has already been accomplished.

"The supreme court cannot deliberate on whether it will decree the detention (of the men) or not, because Spain has not requested it," Justice Ulises De Dios Guzman told the government-run Radio Nacional station.

Guzman said the men "are not really" being released, because they were never detained.

From what I understand, no one should get too excited one way or another about today's events. Montano was arrested, processed, and released on bail. He'll now await his day in court.

The nine men in El Salvador were never under arrest and, at this time, will not be arrested. The Salvadoran government did what was required of it. Interpol sent out a request that the men be located. They have been located. If things change, like an extradition request is officially received, then the Salvadoran government will consider the request. They can't rule on whether they would act on such a request until they actually receive one.

I'm not really in favor of extraditing the men to Spain. Their crimes should be dealt with in El Salvador. I still hope that President Funes uses this opportunity to encourage the assembly to repeal the amnesty law or to at least begin to move the country in that direction.

The Costs of Saying No to Spain

At various times President Funes, former President Cristiani, ANEP and others have voiced their concerns about the potential consequences of extraditing the nine former military officials involved in the murder of the UCA martyrs or opening old wounds in the Salvadoran courts, Gerardo Arbaiza at Contrapunto begins to tackle the question of what happens if El Salvador does not.

What happens to El Salvador's relationship with Spain? Spain is one of El Salvador's largest foreign aid donors. Between 2006 and 2009, Spain donated over $200 million to fund a variety of development projects in the country. The Spanish government has supported projects related to the courts, government institutions and NGOs that could be adversely affected by how El Salvador handles the proceedings. And it's not just relations with Spain; a decision by El Salvador to not do anything about the alleged war criminals might have reverberations throughout the rest of the European Union.

Benjamin Cuellar at the UCA says that whatever decision the court makes might affect how El Salvador is seen throughout the world especially given what has been going on in Guatemala where the Colom administration has taken important strides to advance the cause of justice by arresting and bringing perpetrators of civil war massacres before the courts. How bad does it look for El Salvador when its neighboring "failed state" is strong enough to bring human rights violators before the courts? That says nothing about the trials that have been held or are ongoing in Argentina, Peru and Chile.

As I said the other day, I hope that Spain's judicial proceedings will kick start a process in El Salvador. Not everyone who committed a human rights violation before and during the conflict has to spend the rest of their life in prison, but there needs to be a good faith effort on the part of the government to hold the intellectual authors of the violence to account. And I said much thing the same two years ago on the twentieth anniversary of the Jesuit murders.

 While I am not convinced that the accused will ever see a Spanish courtroom, I am somewhat hopeful that the Spanish investigation as well as Funes' election will help to restart a movement in El Salvador to deal with the human rights violations committed during the 1970s and 1980s...

I have no idea whether Funes' intentions are to recognize previous administrations' culpability in these two crimes and leave it at that or to use these two cases to rally support for a repeal of the 1993 amnesty law and a more comprehensive reconciling of past acts. However, the actions on the part of the Spanish judge might put pressure on El Salvador to pursue an accounting of the past similar to what happened to Augusto Pinochet in Chile.  While the attempt to extradite Pinochet from Britain to Spain to face trial failed, the movement to prosecute Pinochet in Chile gained momentum as a result.  President Funes' two acts and that of Núñez might start El Salvador down a similar path.

Pressure from the international community and civil society might provide Funes with political cover to backtrack on his campaign promise not to push the Legislative Assembly to revoke the amnesty law.

I hope that the actions taken by the Spanish judge, judicial proceedings in Guatemala, as well as support from US congressmen and senators (in addition to disgust brought upon by the knowledge that former Colonel Inocente Orlando Montano lives in Massachusetts) gives the Salvadoran courts and politicians the international support needed to reopen those wounds that never did heal.

Indictment of Salvadoran High Command for Murder of the Jesuit Martyrs

On Monday, a Spanish court indicted 20 Salvadoran soldiers for their involvement in the murders and subsequent cover-up of six Jesuit priests and their housekeeper and her daughter at the University of Central America in November 1989. Among those indicted are former defense ministers General Humberto Larios and Colonel René Emilio Ponce (recently deceased), General Juan Rafael Bustillo, Colonel Juan Orlando Zepeda, Colonel Inocente Orlando Montano, and Colonel Francisco Elena Fuentes. 

These men were members of the military high command that ordered the massacre in the midst of a FMLN offensive. Judge Eloy Velasco Nunez accused these officials of murder, terrorism and crimes against humanity. While a 1991 trial convicted two military officers, the judge said that their trial was "flawed" and "failed to bring the perpetrators to justice" (CNN). 

Several of those who admitted to having participated in the crime were found not guilty. From what I remember, of the two that were convicted, one was an officer. He was allegedly convicted because lower ranking military would have rebelled had they been the only ones to have taken the heat for the murders. The other soldier was found guilty because he shot and killed both Celina and Elba Ramos. 

According to Judge Velasco, the military wanted to kill Ignacio Ellacuría, the UCA’s rector, in order to put a stop to the negotiation s between the FMLN and the president of El Salvador, Alfredo Cristiani. Ellacuría had been pushing for a negotiated solution to the conflict for nearly ten years. This is interesting for several reasons. 

First, the FMLN supposedly launched its final offensive because it was frustrated with the pace of negotiations. While there had been some progress immediately following Cristiani’s election, negotiations stalled in September and October. Had the military not carried out the murders of the Jesuits, it’s possible that the offensive would have undermined international and domestic support for the FMLN and derailed the peace process indefinitely. Even though the FMLN was unhappy with the negotiations, they persisted. Launching a nationwide offensive in the middle of the negotiations might have given the government and the military an opportunity to put an end to the peace process. The Salvadoran military might have gotten what it wanted had it not killed the Jesuits. 

Second, the military leaders responsible for giving the order to kill Ellacuría and to leave no witnesses were driven primarily by self-interest. They had become politically and financially powerful throughout the war and feared that a negotiated solution would put an end to their privileged position in society especially if any agreement called for a total restructuring of the armed forces. In this sense, the military was not driven by a disagreement with Cristiani as to the wisdom of negotiating with the FMLN. Those communists, terrorists, and subversives could not be trusted. They would never accept democracy. Instead, they feared that negotiations might work and that they would lose control. 

Third, there were several coup rumors in the late 1980s and early 1990s coming from the right. What happened within the Salvadoran high command that they launched an attack against Ellacuría and the UCA as well as other pro-democracy advocates, rather than Cristiani? Did they give equal consideration to removing Cristiani? Did they consider other means of squelching negotiations? Was murdering Ellacuría and the other Jesuits in the midst of chaos brought on by the FMLN offensive an opportunity too good to pass up? 

The reactions to the indictments have been as expected. Abraham Abrego, deputy director of the Foundation for the Application and Study of Law (FESPAD), an independent human-rights organization, says that 

"It is a powerful and symbolic message against impunity and sends a clear message to the military that were involved in human rights abuses and crimes against humanity...It restricts the possibility of these military officers fleeing to other countries, because if they try to escape, other countries that have judicial cooperation with Spain can arrest and send them to a tribunal in Spain.”(LA Times)

 The Director of the Human Rights Commission of El Salvador (CDHES) Miguel Montenegro says that 

The judge's decision "gives us encouragement to continue the fight against impunity." (AFP) 

On the other hand, several individuals were not so happy to receive the court’s decision. ARENA member Donato Vaquerano said that 

"We think it is disrespectful to the independence of each country, starting with that. The resolution is disrespecting the General Amnesty Law. That is part of a grand bargain that allowed Salvadorans to take a giant step, of being in an armed conflict to enter into a process of peace and coexistence in a democracy, that we allowed the law.” (Contrapunto)

What happens next? Lawyers involved in the case have three days to file a petition to amend the rulings and five days to begin an appeal. The Spanish indictment calls for the twenty officers to be found and brought before a Spanish court to be tried for the murders. The defendants have ten days to voluntarily appear before that court. After those ten days are up, international arrest warrants can be issued for those who do not voluntarily appear before the court. All states, including El Salvador, are required to act upon such warrants. If Spain asks El Salvador to extradite the accused, it will be up to the Salvadoran Supreme Court to decide.

 In November 2009, I wrote

 "While I am not convinced that the accused will ever see a Spanish courtroom, I am somewhat hopeful that the Spanish investigation as well as Funes' election will help to restart a movement in El Salvador to deal with the human rights violations committed during the 1970s and 1980s…

 Pressure from the international community and civil society might provide Funes with political cover to backtrack on his campaign promise not to push the Legislative Assembly to revoke the amnesty law.” 

I stand by what I said eighteen months ago. I think that it is unlikely that the nineteen surviving officers will see the inside of a Spanish courtroom. Today, the UCA remains opposed to trying the accused in Spain. They support justice as long as it is brought about by a genuinely Salvadoran process. I agree. However, I do hope that this indictment will continue what has been an excruciatingly slow movement towards revisiting the history of El Salvador’s civil war.  

It’s not enough to say both sides committed human rights violations and that both sides agreed to an amnesty that would allow the country to move forward. Even if members of the FMLN, ARENA, the military and the US prefer to keep the amnesty in place, that not’s what the Salvadoran people deserve.

 [See also Tim and El Faro for additional coverage of the indictment. You can also read the judge’s ruling in Spanish here.]

Ponce Dead of a Heart Attack

From the AP

The Salvadoran Defense Department says an army general accused of ordering the 1989 killings of six Jesuit priests and two others has died.

The department says Gen. Rene Emilio Ponce died Monday of heart failure. He was 64.

Ponce was one of 14 Salvadoran military officials facing an investigation for crimes against humanity ordered in 2009 by a Spanish judge. No charges were ever filed against Ponce.

A U.N. truth commission found Ponce ordered the killings of the Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her daughter when he was a colonel in the Salvadoran army. The priests had been suspected of sympathizing with the country's leftist rebel movement.

Ponce was promoted to general the year after the massacre. He was defense minister from 1990 to 1993.

One of the men most responsible for ordering the murder of the Jesuits in November 1989.

21 Years after the Jesuit Murders

After several large university-wide events to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the Jesuit Murders in El Salvador last year, we were only able to gather about a dozen students and faculty for a brief ten-minute prayer service this afternoon at the University of Scranton.  So, instead, here are some videos from last year's celebrations.

Here is Rodolfo Cardenal, S.J. speaking to our university last year.



And here is Dean Brackley, S.J. speaking last April at the university last year when he was awarded the Pedro Arrupe, S.J.  Award.



How did your school or organization remember today's anniversary?