Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado

Accountability in Action :: Rindiendo cuentas

Fujimori on Trial :: Fujimori procesado random header image

Prosecution Continues its Oral Arguments against Fujimori

October 3rd, 2008 · No Comments

October 1, 2008One hundred-second session.  The prosecution continued producing documents seeking to show that Alberto Fujimori was the person behind the crimes committed by the Military Squadron Colina.

1.  The criminal process against Alberto Fujimori for human rights violations.

The head prosecutor, Avelino Guillén Jáuregui, continued with his presentation of documents, which served to demonstrate Fujimori’s criminal responsibility as a perpetrator of the crimes committed by the Military Squadron Colina.  During this session, the documents presented as evidence (witness statements, instructive statements, supreme resolutions, official documents, newspaper reports) were used to prove two themes:

  1. The forming of two different strategies to combat subversion (one legal the other illegal).
  2. Fujimori and Vladimiro Montesinos contributions in the shaping of the Analysis Group (the team that, according to the prosecution, later became the Special Intelligence Squadron Colina.

1.  The parallel strategy to combat subversion.

The prosecution presented evidence seeking to credit the shaping of the National Intelligence Service (NIS) as an operational strategy to combat terrorism.  This evidence was also used to show that the management of the NIS budget and the expenditures reserved for Vladimiro Montesinos were both a result of express orders from Alberto Fujimori.

To prove this the prosecution presented two declassified documents from the United States Embassy that were from the beginning of the 1990s.  These documents purposed to show the path that was followed to implement the dirty war strategy against subversion:

1.1       The first document, from August of 1990, shows the United States Embassy’s assessment, on the account of an unidentified retired Navy official, about the existence of a dual strategy to combat subversion:  a public strategy of respecting human rights and a confidential strategy of dirty war.

1.2       The second document expressed the concerns that the North American Embassy had because of Fujimori’s government’s lack of political will to investigate the Barrios Altos crime.

However, Fujimori’s lawyer, César Nakazaki, argued that the documents had no probative value.  With respect to the first document, he argued that even if the authenticity of the document is recognized, it will have no probative value because it is a declassified document from the United States Embassy that did not identify the Navy official.  With respect to the second document, according to Nakazaki, it would actually provide evidence in favor of Fujimori because it shows that the Embassy recognized his commitment to human rights.

1.3       Supreme Resolutions of appointment: as ad honorem advisor of Cabinet of Advisers of the NIS, Vladimiro Montesinos; as head of the NIS, Julio Salazar Monroe, and as director of the Directorate of Military Intelligence, Juan Rivero Lazo, among others.

In this regard, counsel Nakazaki said that the documents have no probative because they are constituent documents (only show the designations, but do not prove that Fujimori directed a strategy of dirty war).

2.  Fujimori and Vladimiro Montesinos’ contributions in shaping the Analysis Group

The prosecution offered evidence seeking to show the dependence of the NIS Analysis Group on Fujimori, Fujimori’s knowledge of the activities of this group, for which the presented the following documents (among others):

2.1       Efficiency Report of the greatest EP in retirement, Santiago Martin Rivas (chief operator of the Military Squadron Colina).  This report highlights the virtues of Martin Rivas for having commanded, as a member of the Army, special operations of anti-subversion intelligence.

2.2       The migratory movement of the great EP, Santiago Martin Rivas

2.3       Two memoranda of Alberto Fujimori to the Minister of Defense, from June and July of 1991, which ask for presidential commendation and rewards for members of the Analysis Group.  Fujimori’s attorney, Nakazaki, expressed his opinion that these two documents do not show that Fujimori has provided such recognition to a group of annihilation.

2.  Incidents outside of this criminal process

La Cantuta

The same day as this session, Judge Antonia Saquicuray annulled the Cantuta sentence given by the Military Tribunal on September 21, 1994, which sentenced Santiago Martin Rivas, Juan Rivero Lazo, Federico Navarro Pichilingue Perez and Carlos Guevara, among others.  Therefore, she proceeded to open a criminal investigation against these retired Peruvian army officers.

Earlier, relatives of the Cantuta victims, seeking protection from the ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (which ordered sanctions for all those responsible for this crime), asked the Supreme Council of Military Justice to annul the ruling of 1994.

Vladimiro Montesinos

The Peruvian Judiciary ratified the prison sentence given to Vladimiro Montesinos -imprisonment for nine years – for planning a coup in 2000, which would have been given if Fujimori had not been re-elected as President of the Republic that year.  In this case, the Peruvian judiciary confirmed the conviction of then-Peruvian Army commander General Jose Villanueva Ruesta, for supporting this attempted coup.

3.  The next session.

The next session will take place on Friday, October 3, from 9:00 am to 2:00 pm.

Tags: