Images from the (now anulled) sentencing of Efrain Rios Montt for genocide and crimes against humanity



Here are some clips taken immediately after the sentencing of Rios Montt to 80 years in prison, May 10, 2013. Apologies for the delay and for the quality =/

 

 



 

The first is the reaction to the press mobbing the defense table following the sentencing. In the chaos and confusion, it seemed that the defense attorneys were attempting to usher Rios Montt and Rodriguez Sanchez out of the chamber. Judge Barrios had a difficult time controlling the room, and was warning the attorneys not to remove anyone from the chamber, until the special police arrived to take the General straight to prison.

 

 

The second is a clip of the crowd signing a hymn as the special police apparently prepared Rios Montt to be taken to prison. Aquí, no lloró nadie. "Aquí, solo queremos ser humanos" (Here, no one cried. Here, we only want to be human).

 The final clip shows the audience reacting to judge Barrios' feeble attempts to have the press move away from the defense table.

Individualizing Accountability, the Trouble With

 The impacts of a Guatemalan court's decision to sentence former de facto head of state José Efraín Ríos Montt to 80 years in prison for the crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity are only beginning to be felt, and may yet be stymied altogether. The trial and conviction have been hailed as "a great leap forward in the struggle for justice in Guatemala." The three-judge panel, headed by judge Jasmín Barrios, has been rightly praised for its ability to withstand myriad delay tactics, cynical legal challenges, veiled threats, and intimidation from various actors. Yet the Constitutional Court is expected to address several pending legal challenges on Monday, May 20, any of which, including an order to annul the trial, emitted by a pre-trial judge, could erase this landmark ruling.

Sitting in the court room during the final week of the trial and witnessing the palpable tension among Guatemalans outside the chamber, I noticed a very interesting contradiction in the way various groups are struggling to address and argue the facts of the case.

To me it was striking to hear both Ríos Montt's and Rodriguez Sanchez' defense attorneys attempt to assign responsibility for these crimes to the commanders, soldiers, and other individuals who carried them out in the field. Cesar Calderon, the attorney for Rodriguez Sanchez, put it this way: “Criminal responsibility is personal and individual – each person must answer for that which they have done themselves,” referring to individual field commanders operating in the Ixil region. Ríos Montt himself, when he addressed the court, argued that he was "occupied by national and international matters" as head of state, and that while in such a role one must support his commanders, “each of these is responsible for his own territory.”

Meanwhile, the debate in the street and in the Guatemalan press was dominated by competing narratives that screamed "there was genocide in Guatemala! (Sí hubo genocidio!)" or "there was no genocide in Guatemala! (No hubo genocidio!)."

The rallying cries of both camps decline to address the facts of the case as they pertain to whether or not General Ríos Montt oversaw a genocidal campaign against the Maya Ixil (much less the commission of crimes against humanity), dwelling instead on whether or not genocide took place - in Guatemala. The focus on the country became more evident to me in the days after the ruling: in conversations about the trial with normal Guatemalans in and outside of Guatemala City, responses often (but not always) focused on what I took to be the culpability of the country itself. CACIF, a powerful, conservative business group laments on its website that the world will now see Guatemalans as genocidal, like the Nazis.

This first struck me as cynical or superficial, missing the point that Guatemala as a country was not on trial, nor was this a crusade against the armed forces, as many Ríos Montt defenders argued.

This is understandable, though, as no society wants to be associated with the kinds of atrocities that took place in Guatemala. Nor should a country necessarily be painted with the same brush of history that judges the actions of a few leaders.

The court said it was "absolutely convinced" that the massacres, forced displacement, the burning of homes, destruction of crops and use of rape were part of a systematic effort to eliminate the Maya Ixil culture" (you can find the entire 700-plus page verdict here, in Spanish). A project like that is never the sole product of one man, or even one institution. Accordingly, the court instructed the Public Ministry to continue investigating and prosecuting other individuals implicated in the commission of crimes against humanity during this dark chapter of Guatemalan history.

So while individuals should and will be held accountable, Guatemala should be asking itself the tough questions prompted by the decision against Ríos Montt. How is it that one man was able to engineer such widespread destruction of the Ixil culture? Why was it so easy for broad swaths of Guatemalan society to believe that the Ixil community (98 percent of them, according to some military documents) supported or abetted Leftist insurgents? Sitting President Otto Perez Molina, who served as an Army Major in the Ixil area under Ríos Montt during the time of the genocide, may also have some questions to answer. Digging further, have the racism, xenophobia, and economic conditions that permitted the commission of these atrocities changed since the 1980s? The international community has its own uncomfortable self-examination to do: Why were Americans so willing to believe, as President Reagan said, that Ríos Montt had really just got a "bum rap" and that really, human rights in Guatemala "were improving step by step"?

The trouble with individualizing accountability is that it lets society off the hook for allowing or creating the conditions that enable individuals like Ríos Montt to carry out mass atrocities in the first place.

The trend in transitional justice over recent decades has been towards individual responsibility--as opposed to national or institutional responsibility (or outright impunity!). This has been a positive development, and has allowed courts, both domestic and international, to bring individual war criminals to account for their actions. Is it possible though, that by saddling an individual with the responsibility--and therefore the punishment--for crimes against humanity we miss the opportunity to do the kind of deep, introspective soul-searching that would allow us to say with some authority "never again"? Does this trial and conviction (whether upheld or not) distract us from addressing the core social injustices that allowed these atrocities in the first place? Only time will tell, but it does seem that unless Guatemala can secure the conviction against Ríos Montt for crimes of genocide, and therefor recognize that, yes, there was genocide in Guatemala, the deeper questions will never be asked.

This trial has been lauded as a landmark decision that is supposed to have all kinds of implications for rule of law and justice in the country. But this can't happen unless Guatemalans (and others) see themselves as a little bit convicted too.

Rios Montt Sentenced to 80 years prison for genocide and crimes against humanity

 From my article in the Tico Times, a Costa Rican paper...

Former de facto President of Guatemala Efraín Ríos Montt was convicted of genocide and crimes against humanity Friday, and sentenced to 80 years in prison, drawing one of the most highly anticipated and controversial trials in a generation to a close.

Former military intelligence chief José Mauricio Rodríguez was acquitted of both charges.

Ríos Montt and Rodríguez were charged with overseeing the murder of 1,771 Maya Ixils from Quiché department during the 17 months of Ríos Montt’s de facto government between March 1982 and August 1983. Prosecutors had asked the court to sentence each of the defendants to 75 years in prison.

The sentencing began at 4 p.m. on Friday, and presiding Judge Yazmin Barrios quickly presented the court’s unanimous analysis of the facts of the case. Under Ríos Montt, the Ixil population was “criminalized,” and as several important military documents demonstrate, there was a “systematic effort to eliminate the Maya Ixil culture.”

Recalling the powerful testimony of the women who recounted the stories of their rape at the hands of soldiers, the court again was convinced that the widespread use of rape “as a tool of psychological warfare” was systematic and was part of a strategy to eliminate the Ixil.

Witness testimony and evidence demonstrate that Ríos Montt was aware of everything that happened in the Ixil region, and did nothing to stop it.

“We are absolutely convinced,” stated Barrios, that in this case “the elements demonstrating intention to commit genocide have been proven.”

The civilian population of the Maya Ixil was subject to “massive assassinations, massacres, torture and rape, by which we are convinced of the crime of genocide,” she stated before a packed Guatemala City courtroom, with victims, family members, members of the national and international media, and Ríos Montt supporters present.

For this, Ríos Montt is sentenced to 50 years in prison for acts of genocide, plus an additional 30 years for crimes against humanity.

Rodríguez, however, was acquitted of both charges, because he did not have command responsibility as chief of military intelligence. Importantly, the court also directed the Public Ministry to continue investigating other individuals implicated in related crimes.

“Guatemala wants to live in peace. … We do not want atrocities like this to be repeated,” Barrios said.

Following the reading of the sentences, Barrios instructed that as a flight risk, Rios Montt was to be taken directly to prison. A brief pause in the rapid-fire presentation of the verdict allowed the courtroom to burst into a raucous applause and shouts of “justicia!” In the moments following the final words from the tribunal, members of the press mobbed the defense’s table, creating an uneasy sense of chaos as judge Barrios seemed unable to regain control of the situation.

As the audience continued to wait for the special police to arrive and escort the general to prison, the gallery broke into song, mixed with hugs and tears, and cheers of “Yazmin!” The audience eventually filed into the plaza in front of the court where, despite a light rain, the mood was festive and triumphant.

Coincidentally, the region experienced a 5.1 earthquake during the sentencing, though few seemed to notice.

Rios Montt Trial to go forward - sooner than expected

On Tuesday, a judge in Guatemala's "High Impact Court" (Tribunal de Mayor Riesgo) notified the parties involved in the trial of former de facto head of state Efrain Rios Montt that the trial will begin sooner than anticipated. After reviewing complaints from representatives of Rios Montt and Jose Mauricio Rodriguez Sanchez (former intelligence director, also to stand trial for war crimes), the court dismissed claims of impartiality and, surprisingly, moved the date of the trial from mid-August to March 19 of this year.

Guatemalan courts have an historic lack of independence, frequently subject to congressional manipulation and "subordinance" to the president, according to an October presentation in Washington by Supreme Court Justice Cesar Barrientos. Guatemala's High Impact Courts, a recent development in the country's judicial system, are regarded as a vast improvement in the independence and provision of rule of law. The new courts began operating in 2009, and are dedicated to hearing cases relating to drug trafficking, organized crime, money laundering, and human rights abuse, among other things.

The proceedings of the High Impact Courts are highly transparent, according to Justice Yazmin Barrios, and the judges' identities are not hidden. As a result, judges frequently face defamation campaigns and intimidation by those who oppose their work. As the trial moves closer, it is very possible that we will see renewed attacks on the Court itself, the justices, and perhaps the victims or survivors of victims of the war as supporters of the defendants feel increasingly cornered.

The trial itself then, will be a huge test for the Guatemalan judicial system. A fair and impartial trial will go a long way (but certainly won't be enough) in strengthening the professionalism and independence of the judiciary. And, it could be a major step in rejecting a history that legitimizes the atrocities (including genocide) that occured in the early 1980s, offered by regime supporters and other potential beneficiaries of judicial impotence.

Rios Montt will be tried for genocide - Guatemala

Photo courtesy Skylight pictures

We learned yesterday, January 28 2013, that former army general and de facto ruler of Guatemala Efrain Rios Montt will face trial for charges of genocide. Rios Montt led the country during the most violent period of a 36 year internal armed conflict that resulted in over 200,000 deaths, the vast majority of which were innocent indigenous peasants.

Under his tenure (1982-83), the government carried out what many call a "scorched earth" campaign (specifically, he is charged with overseeing the massacre of over 1700 individuals) in the indigenous Ixil areas of of the country.

The former general and his defenders are using an interesting defense, claiming at once that Rios Montt either did not fully control his troops, or was not aware of the dozens of massacres of indigenous communities that happened under his watch. At the same time, Rios Montt et al are labelling the trial as an attack, not on the former general, but on the army as an institution--a clear appeal to public opinion, and maybe even to the popular president Otto Molina Perez, himself a former general who served under Rios Montt.

However, the discovery of a document called Plan Victoria (Victoria 82), sheds doubt on the general's plea of ignorance. The plan, signed by Rios Montt, identified the Ixil ethnicity as subversive and inherently supportive of the leftist rebels engaging the government in battle at the time. As part of a kind of "drain the swamp" strategy, the document planned the annihilation of indigenous communities, according to prosecutors.

On a related note, the documentary by Pamela Yates and Paco de Onis, Granito, includes footage from a conversation with the general in the early 1980s. In the footage, Yates presses the general on accusations of genocide. He denies it outright, of course, but goes on to brag about his tight control over the armed forces, which he presumably exercised in ordering the army not carry out such massacres. "If I can't control the army, then what am I doing here?" the general asks. Whether such footage will be used in the trial is uncertain (though it was used in previous attempts to try Rios Montt, in Spain), but I imagine the prosecution will strongly contest the general's purported lack of control argument.

**Update, Granito producer Paco de Onis writes in an email that "Outtakes from Skylight's documentary Granito: How to Nail a Dictator are being used as filmic evidence in the case to prove the prosecution’s command responsibility liability theory: that Ríos Montt ordered the targeted killings."**

The trial of a former dictator is, in itself, a major milestone in the fight against widespread impunity in Guatemala. A conviction would be a monumental win for the country's battered judicial system. Yet even bringing the man to trial,--as happened in Chile's prosecution of former dictator Pinochet--offers a major symbolic and normative achievement--eroding the reactionary narrative offered against getting too caught up in the past (read: seeking justice for past atrocities), or the mental and social barriers to seeking accountability for the highest political leaders, for example.

The very act of trying a former dictator helps to break down the veneer of legitimacy surrounding the period and acts in question, and helps break down impunity enjoyed by those involved in past atrocities, or those whose more recent crimes simply benefit from this umbrella of impunity. This is, arguably what happened in Argentina, Peru, and Chile, when, following trials of senior political-military leadership, the barriers to accountability for mid- and lower-level opperatives began to be swept away.

One can only hope that as Rios Montt, a pilar supporting impunity in Guatemala, is tried for crimes against humanity, that the umbrella of impunity that benefits organized crime, abusers of women, and gang members will be blown away.