At the Fujimtori Trial: Montesinos and Fujimori meet again--June 30, 2008

Alberto Fujimori and Vladimiro Montesinos, two legendary partners in state-sponsored crime, finally reunite after an eight year lapse. The audience was anxious for this long-awaited encounter. It was unknown what Vladimiro would reveal, if he spoke at all. Since he is currently being prosecuted in separate judicial proceedings that have not concluded he is afforded the right to remain silent in order to avoid self-incrimination. Vladimiro, a lawyer himself, was well aware of this right but chose to proceed. It was at this point that the drama, or what appeared to be a scene from a nightly telenovela, began.

Throughout the Public Prosecutor’s interrogation, Vladimiro remained overwhelmingly arrogant. His dramatic presentation appeared to complicate and in some cases compromise the role of the prosecutor. In general, Vladimiro’s irrelevant responses could be characterized as overly competent legal determinations or sarcastic and disrespectful. In other occasions he claimed that national security could not be compromised and thus revealing the de-classified information was unwarranted. To reinforce the decision to uphold security interests he consistently referenced legal operations within the United States.

The Public Prosecutor’s non-authoritarian interrogation style was not successful in taking the reigns of the court room or in controlling the witness. Rather, the court room remained almost memorized by Vladimiro’s audacity and outbursts. The novella-like drama that took place did not necessarily liberate Fujimori or assist him. However, no blame was directed towards this old friend who would likely reciprocate silence about mutually incriminatory secrets. The friendly, non-verbal exchanges between the former governmental officials confirmed for many the suspicion that these two individuals remained associates.

As the interrogation began with excitement—it ended with relative disappointment. Before the Barrios Altos and Cantuta massacres were mentioned, Vladimiro abruptly announced that he had concluded for the day. He refused to answer any further line of questioning by invoking his right to remain silent. The court room was briefly startled by this communication but some type of dramatization or surprise was expected by many in attendance. The tribunal judges communicated their disappointment with the witness’ swift decision to end the interrogation but this was the extent of the court's capabilities. The relative importance of Vladimiro’s questionable testimony will most certainly not be known for some time but it left the Peruvian public with much to ponder.

At the Fujimori Trial: General Julio Salazar Monroe--June 25, 2008

On Wednesday June 25, Cesar Nagasaki led the three judges of the tribunal and the observers through a dry and quite repetitive series of questions interrogating the ex-director of the SIN (National System of Intelligence), Julio Salazar Monroe, who himself also happens to be a client of Nagasaki. Most of the words that escaped the mouth of Salazar were unsurprising since his interrogator already included the desired answer in the query or utilized a method of closed interrogation.

Some of the central points Nagasaki was attempting to repetitively reinforce included the following:
1. The presence of a channel of information and the absence of a chain of command.
2. The distinction between two types of strategic information: administrative and operational.
3. Functions of the police, the military and intelligence officials are separate and distinct.
4. Isolate Vladimiro Montesinos as an individual who acted outside of his functions at the SIN.
5. Salazar denied having any knowledge of the Barrios Altos or the Cantuta massacre, much less of Grupo Colina or other activities of Montesinos.

According to Salazar, the intelligence sector had a limited non-militaristic scope which included economic, political and psycho-social issues. The data was circulated through a channel of communication, where the final reports only produced administrative strategic intelligence. The characteristics of the data pertaining to the SIN were described as entirely distinct from operational or military intelligence—which would necessitate a chain of command. Throughout Nagasaki’s overall line of questioning the bureaucratic sectors of the police, intelligence and military were constructed to demonstrate their independence and functional differences.

The relationship between Alberto Fujimori, Julio Salazar and Vladimiro Montesinos was also restructured to emphasize a certain distance among the three, this of course did not uphold among the Peruvians who had witnessed multiple exchanges between these individuals. Subsequent to this explanation, Salazar denied any and all knowledge of the planning of Barrios Altos or the Cantuta massacres and of course the infamous Grupo Colina. Salazar revokes the testimony of others like Martín Rivas in Ojo por Ojo of Umberto Jara, that specifically implicates him with the Grupo Colina and their operational strategies to liquidate ‘subversive’ sectors of the population.

--Michelle Doherty

Vladimiro Montesinos Takes the Witness Stand in Fujimori Trial

Yesterday, Vladimiro Montesinos, Alberto Fujimori's intelligence chief and right-hand man, took the witness stand in the trial of the former Peruvian dictator. It was the first time that Fujimori and Montesinos had seen each other since they both fled the country--Montesinos to Venezuela, Fujimori to Japan--in the midst of a massive corruption scandal sparked by Montesinos's videotaped payoffs to opposition party leaders.

Due to his close governing relationship with Fujimori (the two were once known as the "siamese twins") and recent critical statements he made against his former boss, Montesinos's appearance in front of the court was one of the most anticipated of the trial. In his testimony, however, Montesinos--who was alternately described as "loquacious and risible"--attempted to exculpate Fujimori by asserting that he had "no responsibility" for the crimes involved in the case.

You can click here to read the Washington Post's piece on Montesinos's testimony.

Michelle Doherty, a colleague from DJPC and a co-facilitator for the delegation, was present in the courtroom as an international observer. Her firsthand report is forthcoming!

Suggested Reading: Peruvian Truth Commission Report

On the blog, I have included a link to the summary of the Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Final Report in English. The summary, a concise 29-page history of the country's 20-year internal armed conflict, provides a comprehensive introduction to the primary actors in the conflict (the Shining Path, MRTA, the Armed Forces, and the police), as well as a description of the successes and failures of the three governments in power from 1980 to 2000.

The report is probably the most important single document you can read to understand the context of the armed conflict, the nature of the violence in Ayacucho, and the human rights abuses involved in the Fujimori trial. You can click here to access the report or find it in the "Important Links" section on the right hand side of this blog.

(The Peruvian Truth and Reconciliation Commission was formed in June 2001--just 7 months after Fujimori's ignominious resignation and exile in Japan--and released its final report two years later in August 2003.)

--Hayden

"TheFall of Fujimori" at ArgusFest in Denver

Delegates,

This Thursday at 7 pm at the Mercury Cafe in Denver, ArgusFest will show a documentary entitled "The Fall of Fujimori." Afterwards, I will speak about my experience accompanying Gisela Ortiz for Amnesty International and serving as an international observer in the Fujimori trial. If you are one of our Denver-area delegates, I would love to see you there! For information, please give me a call or send me an email.

--Hayden

Meeting with Justices Confirmed for the 24th!

Delegates,

Just a quick message to let you know that I confirmed our meeting with the Supreme Court justices adjudicating the Fujimori trial. Accordingly, we will meet with them on the morning of July 24th in their chambers at the Palace of Justice in Lima.

--Hayden

Unearthing Peru's Largest Mass Grave in Ayacucho

The BBC published a story last week about the unearthing of Peru's largest mass grave from the 20-year internal armed conflict. The Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team (EPAF) is carrying out the exhumation in Putis, an abandoned Andean village in the province of Ayacucho. While in Ayacucho, we will meet with EPAF to learn about their work documenting the atrocities from the armed conflict and their efforts to return the remains of the victims to their families. Click here to read the article.

--Hayden