GUATEMALA

Defenders under attack

The principal targets of violations in Guatemala have been human rights defenders themselves

THE assassination of two prominent Guatemalan indigenous leaders, Mr. Diego Velásquez Brito and Mr. Antonio Pop Caal, in December 2002 has once again exposed the extreme vulnerability of human rights defenders in Guatemala. The body of Mr. Velásquez Brito was found on 21 December 2002, three days after the discovery of Mr. Pop Caal's corpse.

The Special Representative of the UN Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders, Ms Hina Jilani in her report (E/CN.4/2003/104/Add.2) to the 59th session of the CHR following her mission to Guatemala from 26 May to 1 June 2002 states that the "principal targets of violations are human rights defenders involved in efforts to obtain the truth about past violations (including lawyers, prosecutors, forensic experts, personnel of the Ombudsman's Office and victims themselves) and defenders involved in the promotion of economic, social and cultural rights and the rights of indigenous peoples (including trade unionists, peasant workers, members of indigenous peoples' organizations and environmental activists).  Journalists and religious leaders are at times also targeted, depending upon their activities.  While there is a considerable concentration of incidents in Guatemala City, many violations occur in the interior of the country, particularly in the regions of Quiché and San Marcos."

Over the past two years there has been a deterioration in human rights standards in Guatemala which has implications for the security of human rights defenders against whom there has been an increase in confirmed or alleged reports of violations.

These incidents must be considered against the background of a 36-year internal conflict during which human rights violations were often treated with impunity and which had a profound impact on the society, economy and institutions of the state. In March 1994 the Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights was adopted and signed by the former adversaries, the Guatemalan Government and Unidad Revolutionaria Nacional Guatemateca. The United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA) was established in the same year to monitor the compliance of both parties with the Agreement and in 1996 the Agreement for a Firm and Lasting Peace ended the armed conflict. At this time the social, economic and political causes of the conflict were strongly rooted in Guatemalan society and the peace process has been affected from the beginning by the strong resistance of vested economic and other interests. This has hampered progress, despite some positive initiatives since 2000, when the new Government established institutions and agencies to deal with human rights violations (for example a special prosecutor was appointed in May 2002 to investigate cases of violence against and intimidation of human rights defenders), and a plethora of international and domestic legislation safeguarding many aspects of human rights.

Examples of the institutionalised barriers to progress are the limitations on the independence of the judiciary; there is an ongoing need to protect justice officials and witnesses while the delays and cost of judicial processes combine to limit the access of victims to justice and foster impunity for human rights violations. Judges are often so intimidated that they refrain from taking appropriate action. In 2001, 147 complaints of threats against judges were recorded, three judges were killed and one was lynched. Also, witnesses to crimes are often so frightened that they refuse to give evidence.

This means that very few of the reported cases of violations against human rights defenders have ended with satisfactory legal solutions. Other causes of concern are the lack of affirmative action taken to increase indigenous peoples' participation in public life and the fact that discrimination is still not classified as a crime under the Penal Code.

Moreover, human rights defenders have reported that since the beginning of the conflict, the army and right-wing groups have promoted the identification of human rights activity with subversion and terrorism. Since the peace agreement this has shifted to a conception of human rights as synonymous with the rights of criminals and a belief that therefore human rights defenders are responsible for the high crime rate.

In the majority of instances where human rights defenders have been killed (seven in 2001 and eight in the first months of 2002, in addition to attempted killings) victims were from the provinces where they were involved in the defence of the land or labour rights of the local communities and the promotion of economic, social and cultural rights and the rights of indigenous peoples such as trade unionists, peasant workers, members of indigenous peoples' organisations and environmental activists. The situation is reported to have been particularly tense in the regions of Quiche and San Marcos. The fewer killings reported in Guatemala City appear to be related to investigations of past human rights violations and to be directed against prominent human rights NGOs as well as victims, witnesses, lawyers, prosecutors, forensic experts and personnel of the Ombudsman’s Office.

In cases where the physical integrity of human rights defenders has been attacked, including beatings, abductions, one case of rape and one case of forced disappearance, the attacks were mainly directed against representatives of prominent organisations involved in investigations of past human rights violations and the majority of them were in Guatemala City.

Representatives of the National Human Rights Movement claim that it is possible to identify a link between a resurgence of violations against human rights defenders and specific political and other events. This happened, for example in September- October 2001, when the trial of the suspected instigators of the murder of Myrna Mack, the British trained anthropologist, was about to begin (the detective who led the investigation and found evidence of military involvement was also murdered).

There are allegations that the army, which still retains great power in Guatemala and which was responsible for the majority of violations committed during the armed conflict, was involved in some of these cases - although so far investigations have not come to any conclusions as to the identification of the perpetrators. Members of the police force are also known to have been involved and instances of torture and ill-treatment, excessive use of force, extrajudicial executions, abuse of power and corruption have been reported. These institutions operate in a way that is anathema to any democratic society. Violations are also committed by clandestine groups linked to security forces. The police force is characterised by a lack of training and technical capability and is very poorly co-ordinated with prosecutors, which results in inefficiency when trying to bring those who target human rights defenders to justice. The recently appointed Public Prosecutor is trying to surmount these difficulties and, despite the budget of his office having been drastically reduced, to give priority to institutional co-operation.

Another major cause for concern is the doubtful impartiality of the State Intelligence agencies. Meanwhile laws on the creation of a national intelligence system to regulate and supervise its State counterpart have not progressed and the reform of military training and the formulation of a new military doctrine are still at a formative stage. The army continues to perform intelligence activities to combat organised and common crime and there is a grave need for a civilian intelligence service although the proposal for Congress to oversee the intelligence service is still under preparation. It seems that elements that were responsible for human rights abuses during the conflict have reconverged in State agencies.

MINUGUA reported that 58 percent of the cases of violations against human rights are still open. Investigations in 21 percent of cases were closed with the conclusion that there was not enough evidence to attribute responsibility, while in nine percent of the cases the State or a State institution was determined to be responsible. The State, however, has been slow to aid human rights defenders. Senior Government officials have claimed that the alleged victims were often not cooperative and did not provide details necessary for the investigations. Meanwhile human rights activists have complained that in spite of details offered by the victims and witnesses, in several cases the police and the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not open investigations. Victims were given the burden of providing information that should have been gathered through investigation and their cases were closed on the pretext of insufficient information or non-cooperation of the victim or witnesses.

There is thus a need to strengthen the capacity of national institutions to respond to human rights concerns and ensure the rule of law and a need for greater commitment to, and co-ordination of, ongoing government efforts in this regard. This has been made more urgent with the withdrawal of MINUGUA at the end of 2002 and in the light of the forthcoming elections which may cause a resurgence of violence and create a threatening environment for human rights defenders. The implementation of all the peace agreements is a necessary condition for the existence of a safe environment for human rights defenders and for the promotion and protection of human rights in Guatemala. The Government also needs to make greater efforts to gain the trust of civil society, particularly human rights defenders, and discourage the tendency among public officials to see them as adversaries to be challenged (for example there have been instances of defamatory statements against human right defenders by senior government officials) There needs to be a reversal of the tendency witnessed since the 11 September  2001 terrorist attacks on the US to "remilitarise" in the name of the need to fight terrorism.

Despite the considerable work yet to be done the maturity and resilience of civil society organisations in the face of difficult circumstances are impressive. Their courage and confidence in their capacity to influence the course of change in Guatemala are encouraging signs which favour an improvement in the situation for human rights defenders in Guatemala.