Tribunal of the Peoples condemns Guatemalan regime The following interview was given early in February to Renaldo Tucci, Paris correspondent of International Viewpoint, by a Guatemalan exile active in the French movement of solidarity with the
Question. You were at the Permanent Tribunal of the Peoples session on Guatemala, which was held in the last week of January 1983 in Madrid. First of all, can you explain what this tribunal is, its composition, and its aims?
The Permanent Tribunal of the Peoples is a body whose aim is to analyse, at the request of various human-rights organisations, accusations of violation of human rights in a given country. It also studies the economic and political situation. The Tribunal evaluates the proofs of any such violations and if verified, clarifies the causes and those responsible.
Q. What is the origin of the Tribunal?
The Lelio Basso Foundation is Italian senator, a democrat, who had a legal firm that defended in the international courts countries involved in nationalisations of private companies, multi-
He used the fees earned to finance a body defending the rights of and its verdicts have received international attention. (1)
Who are the members of the Tribunal and its judges?
For the most part they are independent personalities, non-partisan but neutral - political personalities, intellectuals, scientists, lawyers, religious leaders.
Q. Who was present, and how was the session organised?
A. As concerns the judges, there was a broad spectrum of sociologists, intellectuals such as Eduardo Galeano; the Nobel-prize winner, George Wald and Eduardo Perez Esquivel; Mgr. Mendez Arceo; and Giulio Girardi (an Italian
The Guatemalan opposition was fully represented, all the popular, democratic, revolutionary organisations; intellectuals; politicians; peasants; workers and students. Various Guatemalan human-rights organisations were also present - the Guatemalan Human-Rights Commission, which had asked for this session, and the Pro-Justicia y Paz (Pro-Justice and Peace) ommittee. Other participants include suillermo Toriello. Guatemalan Chancel lor under the Arbenz government (2) and now the international representative of
(Cultural Workers Association of Guatemala).
There were witnesses for each theme -many were peasants, Carmelita Santos, a catechism teacher Pro-Justicia y Paz; an ex-army sergeant; a peasant forcibly recruited to the "civilian patrols; and Susanna de Medina, wife of Rolando de Medina, an intellectual kidnapped last October.
The reporters and witnesses represented the whole of the Guatemalan opposition. This is very important since it confirms the strength and cohesion of this opposition.
Q. Was the Guatemalan government, the accused, represented at the Tribunal?
Despite being invited, the Guatemalan government did not give any official answer. There were rumours that the President of the Council of State was going to come, accompanied by witnesses and defence lawyers. But given the weight of the evidence and proofs, the government would have found it ceedingly difficult to go there and deny
That is particularly so at the moment when it is trying to improve its international image. It did not come, it because it considered this tribunal had no validity, and was a 'put-up affair.' does not say is that it had been invited to give evidence and bring proofs. should be remembered that at the Tribunal there was a report and evidence given on each theme, and the judges cross-examined both the reports and the witnesses. The government could have delegated people to refute the accusations made against it on every question. But it chose not to do so. Why? Because the direct testimony, documentation, legal arguments, and proofs were irrefutable.
Q Can you give us some examples of the evidence?
A. On the systematic repression of the Rios Montt regime, there was a lot of written evidence given to the judges as well as testimony from witnesses such as Mrs. Consuelo de Azmitia, whose husband and two children were kidnapped. On the army, there was a report and evidence given by an exsergeant. Intellectuals and Indians testified about the cultural genocide, 1. One of the more recent verdicts was the condemnation of the Afghanistan for conducting mass terror in this.
"Tribunal Afghanistan" by Michel Lequenne in IV, Issue No 22, January 24, 1983. - IV
The Arbenz government, which carried out some progressive was overthrown by
CIA organized invasion and coup in 1954. - IV. 3. CGUP: Guatemalan Committee of Patriotic Unity. -IV
15
the ethnocide. Other reports and evidence dealt with the counter-insurgency strategy, persecution of the Church, and of Christians in general etc.
Q What was the verdict?
A. After deliberation behind closed doors, the verdict, set forth in a document of seventy pages, was announced in a press conference given on January 31, (the third anniversary of the Spanish Embassy massacre). I would like to draw out the most important aspects of this closely argued document.
Firstly, with respect to the illegitimacy of the Rios Montt regime: The decrees issued by the latter are in flagrant violation of all international laws and conventions that protect human rights (the Geneva Convention, various UN amendments, the OAS convention).
Secondly, there was definite proof of the genocide. To be sure, the word 'geno cide' is used a lot these days to describe different situations. But it seems to me that for the first time it has been recognised, according to the principles of the Nuremburg Tribunal, that there is genocide in Guatemala. This is true whatever precise definition of genocide one uses. In a striet sense, because the regime is involved in the total extermination of small population centers, and in a broader sense, because we are seeing the partial but very extensive destruction of the Indian community as a whole, about half of which is threatened with extinction. (4) This latter aspect was already defined as genocide by the prescriptions of the Nuremburg Tribunal as well as by the various conventions established later. The Tribunal thus legally, and not just politically, proved that genocide in the precise sense of the term, is taking place in Guatemala.
Thirdly, the Tribunal recognised a state of war exists in Guatemala, which applies both to the internal situation and to the status of the refugees. Although this question was not raised directly in the sessions, the judges also called for the recognition of the Guatemalan organisations, in particular the URNG, as "belligerent parties'. This was a very important decision, much applauded by the people there. Rios Montt, leader of Guatemalan regime (DR) 16
The military think that these are guerrillas (DR)
Fourthly the Tribunal made an appeal to all international bodies and the United States to stop, or suspend, all economic and military aid to the Guatemalan regime.
Finally a letter was sent with a copy of the verdict to the Pope, who will be visiting Guatemala in March. Thus the Pope will be informed of the country's situation and the real living conditions of the people he wants to address.
What is the significance for the URNG (5) of being recognised by the Tribunal, perhaps tomorrow by other bodies, as 'a belligerent party.
In my opinion, the main impact of this resolution is to show that the Guatemalan revolutionary organisations are not some sort of 'gang of subversives.'
On the contrary, these organisations unified in the URNG, have incontestabiy proved they are political organisations, with a project, a programme representing an alternative for the Guatemalan people. They are organisations that decided to take up arms because it was the only way of winning the reforms needed by the Guatemalan people. They are not groups who opt for the armed struggle for the pleasure of it, who enjoy letting off bombs all over the place. No, the reality is that the Guatemalan opposition has been restructured around the perspective of overthrowing the regime, of confronting by force a military dictatorship that will never peacefully relinquish its power. Such a regime will never make the least real reform.
Q. What are the consequences of the Tribunal's work on the struggle of the Guatemalan people to establish a 'patriotic, popular, revolutionary and democratic government'?
A. In the short term, I think it adds to the buildup of international pressure. Indeed, this verdict against the regime comes just after the UN resolution on Guatemala and the resolution adopted by the European parliament on December 16. Furthermore, it has been handed down just before the meeting of the UN sub-Commission on Human Rights in Geneva.
With all the proofs and arguments contained in the Tribunal document, it is possible to irrefutably prove that the Guatemalan government is a regime that not only violates human rights but is also carrying out a systematic policy of genocide. Moreover, all economic and military aid to this regime directly serves the counter-insurgency campaign. International pressure can isolate the Guatemalan regime and help bring closer the day when our people's suffering will be ended.
Q. How can the Permanent Tribunal of the Peoples session on Guatemala help us in our solidarity work?
A. First of all the solidarity movement can use the documents that prove the regime's genocide and the legitimacy of our struggle. The verdict provides us with a good basis for further isolating the Guatemalan regime and developing solidarity with the Guatemalan organisations. We must publicise as widely as possible the Tribunal's work and get it taken up by political parties, trade unions, democratic, human-rights and religious organisations. We want its message to reach a wide public — to show that the regime is not just a military dictavin but that there is a logic behind it — international aid backs it up, particularly from Israel, Taiwan, Chile, and Argentina (ir addition to the US), and there is a strug gle taking place that offers a real political alternative. 4. About 43% of the population is Indian, as defined by linguistic and social criteria. This percentage has been steadily declining fou centuries. Thus it fell by 10% from 53% in 1950 to 43% in 1964. The 1973 census showed no major change from 1964, but such proces do not develop in a linear way but rather in leaps. They are registered in censuses a social changes involved come to their com clusion. The official statistics show only th general trend; they notoriously underestimat the size of the Indian population. - IV 5. URNG: Guatemalan