The Limits to
Portillo’s Policies on Human Rights
By Raul Molina Mejia
Guatemalan President Alfonso Portillo, who was inaugurated on January 14, 2000, made an early decision to define concrete policies in terms of human rights. Some of his first measures looked significant, as if he were seriously willing and in the position of advancing the cause of human rights in Guatemala. For instance, he appointed center-left persons to important positions vis-a-vis human rights and the peace process; he immediately moved forward in attempting to solve the case of Monsignor Juan Gerardi’s assassination; and he repeatedly expressed his commitment to respect for human rights and implementation of the Peace Accords. Coming from the person nominated by the Guatemalan Republican Front (FRG) to the presidency, many analysts gave important weight to this autonomous conduct.
Rather than dismantling the Presidential Commission on Human Rights (COPREDEH), as he had indicated he would do, Portillo appointed Victor Hugo Godoy, a respected progressive lawyer, as its head and asked Godoy to prepare a proposal for governmental policy on human rights. Godoy assembled a group of human rights defenders and drafted a proposal that incorporates human rights non-governmental organizations and other representatives of civil society to fully participate in policy-making and monitor human rights issues. If implemented as proposed, COPREDEH will no longer be seen as the defender of governmental policies and actions, which has been its role particularly in the international arena, but as the coordinator of the executive power’s policies to guarantee human rights and fundamental freedoms.
One of the first tests for COPREDEH was the recent session of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH), where a significant number of pending cases of serious human rights violations from Guatemala were to be assessed, such as the case of Myrna Mack. To the surprise of many who still view President Portillo as a fig-leaf for Rios Montt’s power, Godoy, acting on behalf of the Government of Guatemala, admitted the responsibility of the Guatemalan state in cases under consideration, and offered to negotiate with the plaintiffs in Guatemala in order to proceed to proper compensations.
Based on a political analysis of current events, it must be stressed that President Portillo was compelled to take this position before international bodies for the several reasons. First, he must often reassure the international community that an FRG government presents no threat to the human rights situation. The cases at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) were at a stage where the IACHR was about to move them to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights. Most important of all, since the Historical Clarification Commission’s (CEH) report was made public a year ago, it is impossible for any Guatemalan government to deny the state’s involvement in the serious violations of human rights during the internal armed conflict. Therefore, the position of the government was the result of a combination of the government’s desire to improve its image vis-a-vis human rights, and a pragmatic approach of not fighting lost battles.
Although there have been other important actions taken by Alfonso Portillo, it is clear that there are limits to his decisions. After an initial surprise move to arrest two officers and a former colonel of the army for the assassination of Monsignor Juan Gerardi, the case is looking again very much as it did under President Arzu, with renewed accusations against Father Mario Orantes and Margarita Lopez, the maid. One of the captured officers, Obdulio Villanueva, was released after he presented the alibi that he was in jail for killing Pedro Sas Rompich at the beginning of Arzu’s presidency two days after the murder took place. The judge did not pay attention then to many testimonies affirming that although theoretically Villanueva was in detention, he enjoyed many special privileges, including authorization to leave prison for "important tasks." After protests from human rights organizations and following the testimony presented by a new witness, the judge reconsidered her decision and ordered the re-arrest of Villanueva, on April 14. The new witness, who was also in prison at the time of the crime, indicated that Villanueva had left the jail the day Monsignor Gerardi was killed.
President Portillo committed himself to solving this case during his campaign, counting on the information provided by persons involved or very close to the Archbishop’s Office for Human Rights. He thought that solving this case would discredit Alvaro Arzu’s government and lead to the eventual prosecution of General Espinosa, the former Minister of Defense, at least for covering-up the crime. However, if Portillo fails because of the mantle of impunity that army officers continue to enjoy, his credibility will be significantly hurt. Therefore, it should be expected that Portillo will increase his pressure and determination to clarify this crime before the second anniversary of Gerardi’s murder on April 26.
Even if this crime is solved, however, it is not a measure of human rights compliance nor an indication of real action against impunity for violators of human rights. A more significant test is the governmental attitude vis-a-vis Rigoberta Menchu’s claim before the Spanish Court regarding the crimes perpetrated by several military and civilian former authorities, including General Rios Montt. After 20 years of no action by Guatemalan courts on several dramatic crimes, such as the burning of the Spanish Embassy in Guatemala in 1980, Rigoberta Menchu, following the precedent of capturing General Augusto Pinochet in Great Britain, has rightfully taken the case for genocide, torture and disappearance by Guatemalan armed and security forces to the consideration of the Spanish Court.
After a careful study of the evidence, the court has accepted the case for consideration and action. Right-wing representatives in Guatemala have reacted with anger and hate: army lawyers have initiated legal suits for treason against Rigoberta Menchu. For them, it is treason to take a non-investigated case in Guatemala to a foreign country. She has been threatened with death, with messages stating that treason is paid with death according to Guatemalan laws. Rios Montt, himself, currently the President of Congress, has strongly rejected any intrusion from the Spanish Court regarding Guatemalan nationals. President Portillo has been incapable and/or unwilling to confront Rios Montt and other figures who were responsible for repressive policies or indicate that international involvement in these matters is a welcome human rights development. This is the real face of impunity for the present Guatemalan government.
A human rights policy should also be measured by other actions as well, including those regarding civil and political rights, as well as social, economic, and cultural rights. In the case of Guatemala, given the recent sinister past, truth and justice are especially important. It must be remembered that governmental agencies, and particularly the armed forces, refused to provide information to the Historical Clarification Commission (CEH), using the excuse that all records and additional information had been destroyed a long time ago. However, the National Security Archives based in Washington D.C. was able to bring to light a list of 183 persecuted persons during Mejia Victores’s term as Head of State, most of them dead or disappeared. No one believes this was the only list in existence. Providing all information kept in state agencies, including military and intelligence bodies, and giving positive responses to all recommendations made by the CEH, including all matters dealing with compensation for the victims, would be a clear sign of a sound policy on human rights.
In social and economic matters, one may point to Portillo’s positive measures of promoting a salary increase for workers and appointing Pedro Pablo Palma Lau, alias Commander Pancho, a former guerrilla field commander, to direct the presidential office for solving land conflicts. But one should also see the limits of these measures. The salary increase was finally managed by Rios Montt and Congress in negotiations with the private sector during a period of time long enough for allowing a parallel rise in prices for all goods. Palma Lau, although very committed to justice in land problems, will get involved only in the conflicts pending from Alvaro Arzu’s term. There have been several recent evictions and land disputes, which led to an important campesino march to the capital city on March 30, that are not part of the office’s case load. Additionally, from the very first day in office, Palma Lau has faced the distrust and opposition of rich land tenants and businessmen.
the rejection by Congress of the Code for Children and Youth after the FRG and other right-wing members yielded to the pressure of very conservative sectors of Guatemalan society. This rejection follows the report that Ofelia Calcetas-Santos, UN Special Rapporteur for Children, will be presenting to the UN Commission on Human Rights, after assessing the situation of children in Guatemala in July 1999. In her report she places Guatemala as the fourth leading country in exportation of babies, many of them illegally. She explains that stealing and selling of children is a common practice oriented toward the market of international adoptions. Another reason of concern has been the actions by Luis Rabbe, the Minister of Communications and Public Works, to limit freedom of speech in the media by applying censorship in a couple of cases, and by permitting a close ally of his to pursue a monopoly-oriented control of TV and radio stations.
cases of lynching in the past, instigators of these acts could be traced to people belonging or close to the FRG, and after the elections of November 7, 1999, many violent events to oppose the results were promoted by militants of this party. This sector, which has looked dormant in the past, seems to be getting reactivated because conditions of impunity are prevailing. Members of several trade union federations have been attacked or harassed, such as Ruth Gomez Sanchez from the Union of Health Workers, and recently two National Advancement Party (PAN) members of Congress were abused by members of the security forces, despite the fact that they enjoy legal immunity. When the Minister of Interior was questioned about these abuses, he admitted that he does not have full control of all members of the security forces.
Intimidation practices are on the rise, mostly against organizations and persons who are not aligned with the FRG government. The Human Rights Ombudsman (PDH) has denounced threats by agents of the National Civil Police (PNC) against himself and three members of his personnel in several unrelated cases. Marco Tulio Abadia Molina, the Deputy Attorney General, was dismissed by the FRG-dominated Congress without following due process. Employees of the General Attorney’s Office who have not supported this measure have received threats, and the Attorney General himself has been strongly criticized by the Vice-President, who suggested that the Attorney General resign. As a human rights defender recently expressed, the situation is getting very tense.
It is clear that there is a contradiction between President Portillo’s declared intentions vis-a-vis human rights and the deterioration of the human rights climate. We must remember that Portillo is the President who was the FRG’s candidate, but he is not the FRG’s ideal President, as Rios Montt would be. Human rights may be important for President Portillo, but they have no role in the vision that Rios Montt has of himself as the future Guatemalan president. This fundamental contradiction is the more troubling aspect of today’s political situation, and the correlation of forces between the two leaders is not yet quite clear.