Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado

Accountability in Action :: Rindiendo cuentas

Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado random header image

Witness Salazar Monroe says SIN depended on Fujimori

June 4th, 2008 · 1 Comment

(Witness Julio Salazar Monroe. Picture from the Judicial Power.) 

June 2, 2008

Sixty-sixth session. Former military general and director of the National Intelligence Service (January 1991—August 1998) Julio Salazar Monroe testified in this session. Salazar’s testimony varied from the one he gave in 2001, this time attempting to not incriminate Fujimori. He did admit, however, that the National Intelligence Service (SIN) directly depended on Fujimori and said that Shining Path did not reach strategic equilibrium.

1. Incidents during the hearing:

 

Security measures I

Some journalists complained since new and strange security measures have been enforced by the Peruvian National Police. For example, trial attendees can no longer bring bottles of water to the military base where the trial is held. The Judicial Power said it knows nothing concerning this issue.

 

Security Measures II

What the Judicial Power informed is that in accordance with the importance of the current and up-coming witnesses’ testimony, security measures have been increased for the coming sessions.

 

2. Julio Salazar Monroe’s testimony- Among the most important aspects of the witness’ testimony:

 

Vladimiro Montesinos offered positions in the SIN

According to the witness, he met Vladimiro Montesinos, Fujimori’s advisor and spy chief, in 1964 in the Chorrillos Military School. Later, in June 1990 before Fujimori assumed the presidency, Salazar met with Montesinos, who offered him the position of SIN director, which the witness accepted.

 

Changes in testimony

Salazar altered the declarations he made in 2001 before the Judicial Power in the National Counter-Terrorism Office (DINCOTE) and in his house. For both testimonies, Cesar Nakazaki served as his defense lawyer, who had not yet assumed the defense of Alberto Fujimori. The most interesting changes were:

 

·      Reserve 1 and Reserve 2

“I gave reserve 1 and reserve 2 to Montesinos, which is different than saying Fujimori gave the reserves.” According to Salazar, the transcripts of his declarations on April 18, 2001, indicating that Fujimori gave the reserves, were “incorrectly copied.” He said Fujimori did not order him to give the amounts assigned to Reserve 1 and Reserve 2 to Montesinos in order to compensate agents of the Colina military detachment.

 

Nakazaki, Salazar’s lawyer, had access to the transcripts of Salazar’s testimony at this time but said nothing of it being copied incorrectly.

 

·      The Colina Detachment’s spending

In 2001, Julio Salazar Monroe testified that it was Montesinos who settled the Colina Detachment’s spending, but now he claims he doesn’t know who settled it.

 

The witness’ reason for the changed version is that in 2001, he didn’t have experience giving testimony. However, state prosecutor Avelino Guillén reminded him that he had testified in the military courts from 1994 to 1995 for the La Cantuta case, with the help of a lawyer.  Guillén also reminded Salazar that in his seventh declaration, he asserted that Vladimiro Montesinos could have been the person who settled Colina’s spending.

 

·      Real SIN director

When asked who the real SIN director was, Salazar replied, annoyed: “I was the person who led the meetings carried out in the SIN, to say the contrary is insulting,” which contradicts the testimony of Fujimori, who said that Montesinos was a “key part” of intelligence and was, in practice, the SIN director.

 

Shining Path did not reach strategic equilibrium.

The witness said that in 1991, the city of Lima was taken by subversive group Shining Path, since “everybody knew that you couldn’t escape Lima — not by going north, or south or east, which is why it can be confirmed that Shining Path was already about to take Lima.”

 

The fact that Shining Path was closing in on the city was because it was winning. However, Salazar contradicted himself when he confirmed that the information the SIN received was that Shining Path was retreating since it had lost the area due to military actions.

 

He also said that in 1992, Shining Path had not reached “strategic equilibrium,” which was also testified by Gen. Petronio Fernández Dávila. Furthermore, state prosecutor Guillén reminded the witness that of the eight Shining Path operating groups, seven had been deactivated by the DIRCOTE since May 1992. The witness recognized that this was true.

 

The SIN depended directly on Fujimori.

Salazar acknowledged that according to the law, the SIN depended directly on Alberto Fujimori, who the SIN reported to through intelligence briefings, notes and reports. However, in terms of administration, the SIN depended on the Presidency of the Ministers Council.

 

Furthermore, the witness recognized that in 1992 and 1994, Fujimori and his family lived in the SIN building.

 

4. Next session will continue with Julio Salazar Monroe’s testimony

The next session will continue on Wednesday, June 4, 2008, when Julio Salazar Monroe will continue testifying. Salazar is currently sentenced to 35 years in prison for forced disappearance in the case of La Cantuta. In this sentence, it was established that Fujimori was the highest in command over the Colina detachment, through the SIN. The session on Wednesday will only be carried out during the morning and will be suspended in the afternoon until June 11.

 

Afterward, Nicolás de Bari Hermoza Ríos — who is also represented by César Nakazaki — will testify. Hermoza was the head of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces and testified in 2001 that Fujimori knew about the Colina Detachment’s activities. However, these declarations were given when Nakazaki was not yet representing Alberto Fujimori.

 

According to the State Prosecution’s formal charge (page 30), Fujimori was the highest in command of the Colina Detachment, which he exercised through Vladimiro Montesinos, the de facto director of the SIN. For this reason, the state prosecutor looks to establish who managed the SIN’s funds, in efforts to prove that in practice, it was Montesinos who managed and administrated the SIN.

Tags:

1 response so far ↓

  • 1 Felix Gamboa // Jun 10, 2008 at 7:34 pm

    SESION 67 del 04 Jun 08 Gral Salalzar III Parte
    “Salazar Monroe: después del autogolpe los decretos presidenciales se elaboraban en el SIN”, dice el titular del Portal web, comentamos al respecto que, naturalmente, no se iban a formular en el local del APRA, en la Av Alfonso Ugarte, ni en el local de Acción Popular en el Paseo Colon, la razón y la lógica nos dice que el Presidente Fujimori tenia la necesidad de emplear para esos fines a personas de confianza, es más, justamente la aplicación de esos decretos permitieron ganar la guerra contra el terrorismo, por ello el pueblo peruano vive y vivirá eternamente agradecido a todas las decisiones adoptadas por Fujimori, por ello esta primero en las encuestas del ambiente político. Es más, esto no significa para nada, acto irregular, ni ilícito, sino el uso legitimo del asesoramiento adecuado, como el pueblo peruano lo reconoce.
    “Fujimori tenía el máximo poseía el poder de la cadena de mando del destacamento Colina, y este mando lo ejercía a través de Vladimiro Montesinos Torres, quien era asesor personal de Fujimori y el Jefe real del SIN.”, dice el portal web, comentamos, en primer término, el SIN no tiene potestades operativas ni en teoría (inteligencia no destruye al enemigo, sino lo identifica, lo ubica y avisa a los operativos que son las fuerzas armadas y PNP), ni en la praxis (no comanda tropas, ni fuerzas de ninguna naturaleza), lo que viene quedando demostrado a través de los testimonios y la exhibición y lectura de los documentos pertinentes (leyes y directivas), en segundo término, documentadamente el ejército a través de un oficio, ha respondido al tribunal que el tal destacamento colina no existió (firmado por el Gral Cacho Vargas), en tercer lugar ninguno de los oficiales, supuestos conductores de estas matanzas, ha declarado recibir órdenes de Montesinos. Por tanto, esta afirmación deviene en irreal y solo existe en la imaginación de la fiscalía, pues tan descabellada esta toda esta maraña, que en otro tribunal han condenado al Gral Salazar por ser el “autor mediato”, lo que deviene en contradicciones, si este señor era el jefe virtual por que el real era Montesinos, como es que es que él (autor mediato) manejaba el aparato de poder, sino era el verdadero jefe. Esto prueba que en los juicios las sentencias son sacadas de los pelos, pues no existen argumentos validos para que en los hechos se inmiscuyan a los altos funcionarios, pues las normas que emitieron y su comportamiento personal son contradictorios con las acusaciones.

You must log in to post a comment.