Guatemala: More of the Shameful Same?
Guatemala: More of the Shameful Same?
• Guatemala faces meltdown as ex-paramilitaries threaten to seize the Constitutional Court building and block transportation routes throughout the country, beginning today (June 28).
• The group Patrullas de Autodefensa Civil (PAC) demands payment for their brutal services on behalf of the government during the era of civic strife which ripped the country apart.
• The Constitutional Court has declared former President Alfonso Portillo’s promise to pay $650 to each member of the ex-PAC unconstitutional, thus setting the stage for the conflict.
• The government must now face the consequences of the problem it created when it militarized Guatemalan society – particularly the Mayans of the Altiplano – during the nation’s decade long murderous reign by the military and its allies.
Mario López Tahuite, spokesman for the ex-paramilitary group Patrullas de Autodefensa Civil (PAC), issued a statement on Wednesday, June 23, demanding that the group be paid the promised compensation for the brutal murders that they committed on behalf of the Guatemalan military during the nation’s 36-year-civil war. The ex-paramilitaries threatened to seize control of the Constitutional Court building and disrupt transportation routes across the country if their demands are not met by June 28, saying, “we are waiting for the government to announce the payment: if it does not, we will take action.” The group has already shown on a number of occasions its ability to severely disrupt Guatemalan society and if they follow through with their threats, they will most likely be ready to once again strike a vicious blow against civic order.
Constitutional Court Declares
Payment Unconstitutional
The ultimatum comes in response
to a June 21 ruling by the Guatemalan Constitutional Court,
which stated that the promise of financial aid offered by
former President Alfonso Portillo to the ex-paramilitary
group was unconstitutional. The Court argued that only the
legislature, not the president, has the authority to approve
this kind of settlement. The ruling was a courageous act of
defiance on the part of the Constitutional Court, declaring
to the world that paramilitaries are no longer above the law
in Guatemala. The Court’s groundbreaking action could become
the first step in a new direction for a country that
traditionally has been consumed by violence and where the
justice system has been the target of scathing international
criticism.
Negotiation through Violence
The threats
issued by the ex-paramilitaries are merely the latest
installment in a long-running saga of violent exchanges with
the pariah group. On October 26, 2003, armed ex-paramilitary
fighters seized four journalists and threatened to burn them
alive. Fredy Lopez and Alberto Ramierez, reporters from the
Guatemalan newspaper Prensa Libre, photographers Emerson
Diaz and Mario Linares and three other people were held as a
bargaining tool by 500 angry ex-paramilitary members. The
paras proceeded to seize control of a small Guatemalan town,
blocking the highway and holding off police and army
troops.
On October 27, then-Vice President Francisco Reyes issued a televised statement declaring that the government was “not in a position to negotiate… this kind of pressure tactic is not the way to resolve these problems." Reyes asked Guatemalans to pray for the hostages' release. However, the government was not able to maintain its defiant stance for long and eventually submitted to the demands of the ex-paramilitaries. The hostages were released when the government agreed to release the $650 bonus promised to each man who had served in the PAC.
A History of Brutality
The Patrullas de Autodefensa Civil were formed in late
1981, during arguably the bloodiest period of an extremely
bloody civil war, in which 200,000 people tragically lost
their lives. When the Guatemalan government began to fear
that the civilian population would provide a fertile
recruiting ground for the insurgency, it organized a system
of civil patrols, which became an integral part of the
government’s counter-insurgency strategy. This strategy
militarized the poor, mostly indigenous population, mainly
in the highlands and other agricultural regions, and
provided the government with an auxiliary force for the army
and a death squad to use against its civil opposition.
Although the paramilitary groups were initially formed in
1981 under General Romeo Lucas Garcia, it was not until
April 1, 1982 that they were legally established by former
U.S. confidante and brutal dictator General Rios Montt. This
militarization of the core fabric of society, and the
heinous atrocities they routinely committed, has left a
highly disturbed group of marginalized ex-fighters who have
been accused of committing numerous brutal acts of violence,
both in the course of the civil war and since its end. A UN
investigation conducted after the signing of the peace
accords concluded that the army and its proxies carried out
93 per cent of the atrocities committed during the civil
war.
Futile Search for a Solution
In order to effect
a long-term solution to the problem, the Guatemalan
government must attempt to rehabilitate these troubled and
often abused men, not just pay them off. In most instances,
they did not freely volunteer to join the force, but were
cajoled into signing up with the PAC or face dire
consequences. However, none of Guatemala’s recent
governments have shared this point of view throughout the
long-running battle over compensation. The authorities’
handling of the claim has been at best irresponsible and at
worst highly provocative. Every time they yielded to the
ex-paramilitaries’ demands, the government not only
reinforced the belief that disruptive and violent actions
were acceptable tools in the negotiation process, but also
that these men who had committed the most despicable acts of
violence should be compensated for them. Frank La Rue, the
recently appointed head of the presidential office, has
joined with a number of human rights organizations in
arguing that the ex-paramilitaries should not receive any
money due to the horrendous human rights violations
attributed to them during the conflict.
An attempt to resolve the controversy in July 2002 produced a compensation package in which the government would pay each of the 520,000 members of the former paramilitary group $650 in three installments. By agreeing to the scheme, former President Portillo committed his country to paying over 300 million dollars in claims; meanwhile, the former president himself has decamped to Mexico amid allegations of financial irregularities and a Panamanian bank account.
Portillo’s plan encountered fierce criticism from opponents who claimed that the government was simply rewarding criminals, rather than attempting to bring them to justice. Further criticism arose when the initial payments were made; a number of former paramilitaries claimed that they had been left off of the list of those eligible to receive the payments.
President Berger: Economics before morals?
During his
2003 election campaign, President Óscar Berger promised to
fulfill his predecessor’s pledge and complete the payments.
Issuing a statement on June 23, he said ‘it is an obligation
of the state and we should honor it in some way.’ Berger,
the conservative former Mayor of Guatemala City, has
publicly expressed his personal preference for providing
agricultural assistance to the ex-PAC rather than financial
compensation. Since coming to office, he has put a great
deal of energy into coping with the country’s current fiscal
deficit of $875 million, which he perceives as
unsustainable. Despite a public outcry, he has even courted
Rios Montt and his Guatemalan Republican Front party, a man
and a party he denounced during the 2004 election as corrupt
an authoritarian.
Berger’s handling of this situation has focused more on solving the country’s financial problems then on healing the wounds inflicted during Guatemala’s brutal civil war. If the legislature does not authorize payment of the compensation, the ex-paramilitaries will essentially hold the country to ransom. Yet acceding to these demands will not address the underlying problem of a deeply stained society whose social fabric is in desperate need of repair.
This analysis was prepared by Kirstin Kramer and Eleanor Thomas, COHA Research Associates