Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado

Accountability in Action :: Rindiendo cuentas

Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado random header image

Salazar confirms that he received verbal orders from Fujimori

June 18th, 2008 · 1 Comment

undefined  June 16, 2008

Seventieth session. Former military official Julio Salazar Monroe continued his testimony. Through Salazar’s testimony, the Public Prosecutor seeks to demonstrate (as stated on p.30 of the formal accusation), that Fujimori was the highest power in the Colina detachment’s command chain and decisions on the execution of crimes were given through Vladimiro Montesinos, Fujimori’s personal advisor and de facto director of the National Intelligence Service (SIN).

1. Incidents during the hearing:

Fujimori’s defense lawyers

Fujimori’s lawyer César Nakazaki was not present at this session, rather it was lawyer Gladys Vallejo and lawyer Johan Pinedo who assumed Fujimori’s defense. On various other occasions they have also assumed legal representation of Salazar Monroe – the witness during this session.

However, in the first recess during the trial, Luis Delgado Aparicio (former secretary general of the pro-Fujimori political movement, Si Cumple), was seen talking to lawyers Vallejo and Pinedo about asking the Court for a trial suspension until Wednesday, June 18. Delgado’s argument was that Fujimori was bleeding after his operation, which caused him some pain.

Satisfactory medical report

On resuming the session, defense lawyer Pinedo asked the Court to suspend the session, for the reasons provided by Delgado. However, the Court asked the doctors from the Institute of Legal Medicine and from the National Penitentiary Institute to evaluate Fujimori’s health, confirming that the defendant could indeed continue with the session. The session ended at 5pm for a total of six hours, with recesses each two hours. At the beginning of the session, a report stating Fujimori’s satisfactory health was turned in.

JUICIOALBERTOFUJIMORI2-13-06-080-2.jpg picture by praxislima

2. Julio Salazar Monroe’s testimony – The most relevant parts of Salazar’s testimony:

He received direct verbal orders from Fujimori

The witness stated that he received direct orders from Fujimori, which were given verbally. Once Salazar had carried out the orders, he returned to Fujimori, giving a direct and oral account of his task.

Contradictions on the Tarata bombing

In 2003, Salazar testified before the Judicial Power on the Tarata Street bombing, saying that he, as official director of the SIN, drafted a report that he handed in to Fujimori. However, during the current trial against Fujimori, Salazar refused to remember this and said that he probably would have written a report, but that he wasn’t sure and thus couldn’t affirm it as he did in 2003. It’s important to keep in mind that Salazar was legally represented by Nakazaki, who had not yet assumed the legal defense of Alberto Fujimori. Moreover, Fujimori was at this time in Japan and showed no signs of an intended return to Peru.

National Defense Council and Vladimiro Montesinos

The witness also said that Vladimiro Montesinos participated in the National Defense Council’s meetings.

The SIN verbally decided on the formation of the Analysis Group

According to Salazar, he received a request from the former head of the Counter Subversion Office (DIRCOTE) Héctor John Caro to form a group of analysts. The agreement for the group’s formation was verbal, thus there is no written document that registers the agreement: “Everything was verbal, there is no written document.”

It’s important to keep in mind that one of the principal arguments of Fujimori’s defense is that there is no written document signed by Fujimori that approved the Barrios Altos and La Cantuta crimes.

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

At the next session on Wednesday, June 18, the Public Prosecutor will continue his examination of Salazar Monroe. Afterward, the witness will be examined by the lawyers for the victims’ families, then by Fujimori’s defense lawyers (who are also Salazar Monroe’s lawyers) and lastly by the Court.


1 response so far ↓

  • 1 Felix Gamboa // Jun 25, 2008 at 12:05 pm

    SESSION 70 of the 16 08 JUN Gral Salazar I Starts off CORROBORATED MY COMMENTARIES REFERRED TO THE NONEXISTENCE OF THE GROUP HILL, IN THE ARMY, FACT THAT ALREADY IT HAD INFORMED THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF INTO I EXERCISE JOSE PIECE, AT THE TIME, BEFORE A REQUIREMENT OF JUSTICE. The witness Gral Salazar reads: “Office Nº 343 of the 16 of April of the 2008, Peruvian Ejercito responds to him, with respect to Dirty War, the following thing: in relation to that information it is possible to indicate that the army in no case, institutionally instructed and/or arranged to the military personnel in order that dirty war maintained a policy denominated, also, never was proprietor of the Consultores company and Constructores de Proyectos America Joint-stock company, the expression dirty war, is a used term common in civil means since in military means, this terminology is not used. In the second office one requested some precisions with respect to war of low intensity, and the Peruvian army conversation in the following paragraph: in relation to this information the army during the fight against the terrorism, institutionally in no case, arranged that the military personnel wages the denominated war of low intensity, that supposedly consisted of a policy of extrajudicial executions, as well as it informs his that this I finish is not of use in I exercise. The third office talked about manual 38-20, and says to ME: on the matter after to have verified in the existing archives in the Intelligence service of the Army (SIE) and the Direction of Intelligence of the Army (DINTE), does not exist the manual ME 38-20. Finally in the fourth office, one talked about the following thing: on the matter after to have coordinated and to have had the verification in the registries and archives the DINTE and the SIE, do not exist any document and/or information related to the plan of operations denominated Cipango, as well as the company COPRAMSA, that has served like facade of the army. It is an official answer that the army is giving to the requirements of Mrs Pichilingue, signed by the Director of Ground operations of Ejercito Gral Miguel Red Enrique Garci’a, the authenticated copies have been sent to the Inter-American Commission of Human rights of Washington. Also I have another office, referring to another aspect, in which the army in its same line, gives answer in the following terms: it has been verified in the existing general archives in the army and one has not been documents and/or information that in 1990 to 1993, a group or denominated detachment of intelligence existed Hill, as well as an intelligence detachment Lima, signed by the same general”. Consequently the supposed tests of the formal existence of the group hill and all that with the novel of the journalist Rockrose, we would affirm as it from the first day, have been a fantastic creation of the novelists, who come motivating the world-wide ridiculous situation from all the effective judicial system, this do not mean that they do not exist responsible for the slaughters, the military justice volume action, emitted sentences and all the pertinent one. Trying to lapse all this, on the basis of “sincere confessions” of sergeant majors who confessed crimes that did not commit (there was one it was not in the place of the facts and confessed to have killed 14 people), with the purpose of to justify the persecution to Fujimori and the military High Commands, the unique thing that do is to put to Peru in the political status of the sub-Sahara countries, where there is law nor no order, and what it is executed is consequence of the will of the turn leader and its group of being able. SESSION 70 of the 16 08 JUN Gral Salazar II Starts off REPEATEDLY THE CREATION OF WITNESSES IS VERIFIED, WE EVALUATED THE SUITABILITY OF WITNESS KETIN AT THE TIME VIDAL, AND TODAY IT IS VERIFIED. To 10,29 hrs Fiscal: UD by the end of June of the 91 sent to the CAP Martin Rivas and the Tte. CRL Rodriguez Savalbascoa to gather of the lengthy DIRCOTE to the Tito Valley Travesaño and Yovanca Pardavè? Salazar: what Vidal has said to the Gral Ketìn here is false, that has mentioned it in this room the Gral Vidal, I deny that it totally, is false. And that is thing logical, because to think that the Head of WITHOUT orders that prisoners take shelter to take them to the SIE, that not him encounter logical, that the Head of WITHOUT orders that they remove to prisoners to take them to the SIE, that is totally false. Public prosecutor: called by telephone to the Gral Ketìn Vidal? Salazar: I never called it, that version of Ketìn Vidal is false. More ahead it affirms Salazar: Vidal says that he went accompanying to the Gral Expensive John to WITHOUT and that in that meeting that he had with me he that way saw the CAP Martin Rivas and the Comdte Rodriguez Savalbascoa, that is totally false,…, these officials never were in no meeting. UNTIL the QUESTION HE IS FOOLISH, Fiscal: UD podia not to receive any type of orders from the Cge? Salazar: Acuérdese that the Head of WITHOUT tapeworm the rank of Minister, is impossible that a Commander-in-chief of an order to a Minister, was independent and independent organisms. The Salazar witness said: “saw I them, consists, I to me I did it”, sustaining in this experience is that she explained with luxury of details, the process of how she is that the analysis group was developed, how she is that they went to stop to the “factory of the SIE”, how they informed and that they produced, consequently was unmasked patraña armed by the prosecutors and she is seeing that really that people had a task, that was not to kill people. To 16,15 hrs the lost Public prosecutor, does not know nor what asks, Salazar says to him: I have been explaining that it for not less than 10 minutes with luxury of details; the President of the Room says: the witness already answered that question. The quality, productivity and consequences of this hearing under the interrogation system of the office of the public prosecutor, say everything, nothing don’t mention it, everything to it what they argue in the accusation is not corroborated in no point by this witness, worse still, is refuted totally. The absence of the holder of the defense says everything to it, so that it is going to be in a dialogue that happens in intrascendente, because it would only mean loss of time, therefore its collaborators took the case, naturally with the same efficiency, but the head does not have paraqué to be spent.

You must log in to post a comment.