The Human Rights Coordinator (HR) invited me to attend the session on Friday, January 4, 2008 of the trial of the former president of Peru, Alberto Fujimori. By bus we went to the premises of the Directorate of Special Operations of the Police (DIROES), the Bravo Chico farm, where this historic trial takes place. After passing through security checks, we entered the small room intended for the public, which is divided into two blocks of seats. On one side, the wing occupied by the Fujimoristas, and on the other, the location of the victims' relatives, human rights organizations and observers. A glass separated us from the courtroom, through which we could comfortably see the protagonists of the criminal process. The prosecutor and the lawyers, both for the civil side and Fujimori's defense, the lawyer César Nakazaki and his collaborators, were already in place. Suddenly Fujimori entered and crossed in front of me. The group of Fujimori stood up and saluted him, in the Japanese style, although the delegation of his supporters was not made up exclusively of Nikkei. Outside of three of their children, there really weren't any other Nikkei and racially it was quite a diverse group.
My remarks were abruptly cut off because the Court entered and someone asked us to stand. Judge César San Martín, who presides over the trial, looked calm and in complete control and ordered the protocol part to be carried out, which was carried out very quickly. The first witness of the process then entered. On that day, precisely, the presentation of witnesses began, beginning with those invited by the prosecution. It was Mrs. Natividad Condorcahuana, survivor of the Barrios Altos massacre.
After the legal oath, the prosecutor began the interrogation and the witness related that on November 3, 1991, while she was living in the district of Villa El Salvador and working as a street vendor of medicinal herbs, she was invited by her brother-in-law to a “ Pollada” 1 organized by the inhabitants of the Jirón Huanta tenement in the Barrios Altos district. With this activity, they hoped to raise funds to repair the drainage of the place and for that they sold the respective cards, one of which Mrs. Condorcahuana was carrying when she arrived at the premises at 8:30 pm. She found about 20 people and, since she hardly knew to no one, he went to his brother-in-law's house; She was there until 11:30 pm. At that time she went to look for her husband, who had stayed drinking liquor with the other guests in the patio of the old house.
No one was dancing and they had only been drinking liquor and talking. She first ran into her brother-in-law, who invited her to toast with a glass of beer. Suddenly, she saw her husband fall to the ground and thought he was fighting with a guest. He walked over and helped him sit on a chair. But, his head was broken and he was bleeding. At that same moment he realized that a group of strange people had entered the patio. With foul words they ordered them all to get on the ground. Mr. Ríos, who was the leader of the alley, went out to meet such a group and said to one of them: “what's up boss?” 2 , but a burst of ammunition killed him. There were about ten people, two of them with their faces covered, some wearing long coats and others wearing military clothing. Mrs. Condorcahuana crouched next to the wall. When Mr. Ríos fell, his son ran towards him, shouting “not my dad!”, but a shootout ended the boy. Then the woman's desperate screams and the voice of one of the aggressors were heard, who said, "Get away, madame, it's not with you." Another woman told her “let's go, comadre,” but she fell injured. That night 15 people died and 4 survived, among whom were the couple León Condorcahuana.
Mrs. Condorcahuana received a bullet in the temple and several impacts destroyed her right thigh. In total, 11 bullets wounded her and two bullets still remain in her body. She was transferred to the 2 de Mayo hospital and, as her husband was also injured, her 5 youngest children were left alone. They continued selling herbs, without receiving any support from the State. The woman was questioned by the police and it was established that neither she nor her husband were terrorists. The judicial investigation after the events found 111 bullet casings in the yard and determined that they came from submachine guns with silencers. Mrs. Condorcahuana has not been able to return to work and her life has changed radically. He suffers from a permanent knee injury and walks with difficulty.
After the interrogation of the civil party, it was the turn of lawyer Nakazaki, who began by expressing his solidarity with the sufferings of the lady and was interested in making it clear that what happened was an infernal shooting and not a sequence of murders of the Ríos family. . The judge then asked the witness to clarify that she had never been threatened, neither during her hospitalization nor afterwards. A second question from the judge led the woman to say that she and her husband had received compensation of 165 thousand dollars, thanks to a ruling from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of San José and that today they are owners of Internet booths. .
Next it was the turn of Mr. Felipe León, Mrs. Condorcahuana's husband, who repeated the story given by his wife. He added that he was hit 6 times by bullets and yet, at the end of everything, he crawled badly injured through the alley to look for help. He found a passerby and was taken to the nearby Lima Maternal and Child Hospital. He was in three hospitals in just 15 days because his children couldn't figure out what to do and because his wife was much worse than him. Although Mr. León still has a bullet in his body to this day, he worked for a while, took out some savings he had in a bank and finished paying his wife's high medical expenses. However, he profusely thanked the police, specifically the National Directorate Against Terrorism (DINCOTE), which conducted an investigation into his possible connections with the Shining Path and promptly left him “clean.” They did not plant evidence or falsely involve him. To him, this behavior of the police seems extraordinary and he reiterates his gratitude. He also reveals that the police helped him leave the hospital without paying his hospitalization bill.
Seven years later, Judge Dr. Saquicuray opened the Barrios Altos case through criminal proceedings. A priest who identified himself as Father Carlos then visited Mr. León, offering help on behalf of President Fujimori. They talked and, given the priest's offer, he asked how help could be obtained. The Father gave him an address and he went to La Recoleta School, where he found Father Lanssiers, who became upset when León asked for strong financial help and responded crudely. León got angry and left. For ten years he continued to seek help, but the doors of the Government Palace and the Palace of Justice were closed.
Nakazaki then interrogates to ask for details about the absence of official threats and the good quality of police work. Next, Nakazaki himself indicates that in 4 trials that Mr. León has attended, it was the first time that he mentioned the matter of Father Lanssiers. The judge is interested and asks the witness, why has he kept silent about this point for so many years, if his lawyers knew and what did they advise him? Mr. León responds that 5 years ago he was threatened by a stranger on the street, who became scared and did not give his testimony to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (CVR). He decided to remain silent and not dwell so much on his personal tragedy. At that moment, the judge asked Fujimori if he knows the aforementioned Father Carlos and if he sent Lanssiers to talk with León. Fujimori stammers and responds that he did not know Father Carlos and that he never asked Lanssiers to make a request on his behalf to the victims of Barrios Altos.
Cut-off time arrived, it was 11:30 am and we were in the yard for 15 minutes. The session was restarted to continue until 2:00 pm The highlight of the day was the presentation of Gustavo Gorriti, a journalist kidnapped on the day of the self-coup of April 5, 1992. Again, the prosecutor begins the interrogation and Gorriti relates that it had been a while investigating and publishing about the role of Vladimiro Montesinos in the Fujimori government, who knew that he had been a captain convicted of treason and that after serving a military prison he graduated as a lawyer, later working as a defender of drug traffickers. It seemed like a terrible influence on the government. He said that he asked Fujimori several times about Montesinos, at every press conference that was held. Fujimori always denied this, maintaining that he was only a lower-ranking official with no power or influence in the government. Knowing the vengeful nature of Montesinos, Gorriti - for his part - had taken his precautions, formulated a plan, adopted security measures in his house and devised with his wife a system of alerts and contacts.
On Sunday, April 5, 1992, he went out with his wife to walk their dogs and observed discreet police surveillance, but parked very close to his house. He returned to his home and received a phone call at the same time he was watching the self-coup speech “dissolve, dissolve” 3 on television. He looked out the window and saw that the surveillance had disappeared. At 11 pm he went out to visit Enrique Zileri, director of the magazine Caretas, they exchanged information and agreed to notify their homes of the possible arrest of both. At 3 am on April 6, while he was writing a dispatch for the international press on his computer, there was a knock on the door of his house. It was a large group that identified itself as State Security. While he opened the door, three individuals had already entered by climbing the front wall and at that moment they were descending towards the garden of the house. About 12 people entered, dressed in civilian clothes, although carrying war weapons. When they ordered him to accompany them, there was resistance and struggle, until one imposed his authority. Gorriti negotiated and got everyone to leave in exchange for surrendering. However, they took his computer. He said goodbye to his wife and daughters and was taken to a National Intelligence Service van.
Gorriti was transferred to Army Headquarters, known as the “Pentagonito.” The guard who accompanied him handed him over to an officer who would later confine him in a semi-basement of the building, where there were bars, two rooms and a bathroom, all very dirty. His detention was clandestine and he declared a hunger strike. A day and a half later he would be handed over to the police and released. In the meantime, in the execution of their plans, both his wife and Zileri had made countless contacts and relationships and there had been intense international pressure from embassies and journalists' associations. After sharing prison with other imprisoned journalists, Gorriti found human rights lawyers and regained his freedom; They returned his computer shortly afterward.
Days later, Fujimori called a press conference with the international media, which was related to the April 5 self-coup. Gorriti attended the meeting that took place at the Government Palace, they let him in and asked Fujimori about his arrest. In his response, Fujimori denied that Montesinos had intervened in Gorriti's case and mentioned the situation of journalist Yovera's brothers, who were also kidnapped.
According to Gorriti, Fujimori's response reveals that he was aware of his kidnapping and also of the Yovera brothers. For Gorriti, this information is crucial because it proves the former president's connection to the kidnapping of citizens. He says that a few years ago, working on the “Colina” case, he spoke with General Nicolás Hermoza - then General Commander of the Army and currently imprisoned in the San Jorge prison - asking him why he had signed the order to kidnap him. His response was: “what did you want me to do? Someone had to do it, the others refused to sign, I had to act.” Hermoza added, as Gorriti remembers, that he was sorry for it. At that time, Gorriti asked Nakazaki if Hermoza informed him of that conversation. This is because Nakazaki is also Hermoza's lawyer and, paradoxically, both Fujimori and the general accuse each other of being guilty of the "excesses."
In turn, Nakazaki maintained, first, that it was not a kidnapping but an illegal detention and, second, that his client knew nothing. He specified that Gorriti was authorized to enter the Palace and then ask questions naturally during the press conference, which meant that he had not been banned by Fujimori. On the contrary, according to Nakazaki, Fujimori found out about Gorriti's illegal detention at that very moment. With this matter and at 2 pm the session ended.
It is clear to me that Nakazaki's strategy does not allege Fujimori's complete innocence, but rather disputes the interpretation of the facts. They were not selective murders but indiscriminate shootings. They were not kidnappings either, but illegal detentions. His client had designed the general strategy, but the details were in charge of subordinates. For Nakazaki, it would be about lowering the reading of the facts to reduce the penalty. It is a reiteration of the attitude during the first trial, in which the sentence was handed down quickly because Fujimori acquiesced. That is, the trial by the false prosecutor who invaded the house of Trinidad Becerra (Montesinos' wife), when Fujimori was looking for the videos recorded and saved by Montesinos. In that first trial, Fujimori acknowledged a degree of guilt and was sentenced to six years in prison. Likewise, in these trials that are for more complex reasons such as human rights and that can put you in prison for up to 30 years, your lawyer seems to advise you to admit little and not deny everything. Nakazaki prefers that Fujimori appear powerful and in control of his government, arguing that unfortunately there were some excesses due to the zeal of certain bad subordinates.
Finally, my assessment is that Fujimori's trial is carried out correctly. I believe that the Court offers a guarantee of impartiality and transparency. It should be remembered that the process is broadcast live on TV channel 8, although unfortunately only on cable. But, citizens are forming their own opinion. We are facing a transcendent fact and no one ignores it, nor is there a strong political component. Passions rain down and older people discuss the topic with some acrimony. But, the young people are happy that it is happening, that the rulers know that they must be clean or risk being imprisoned. Furthermore, like rarely in Peru, it is evident to everyone that Fujimori is having an impeccable trial, that if he is not guilty, his brilliant lawyer will get him out of prison. But, if he is found responsible for criminal activities, he will prolong his stay behind bars. The entire country and each and every one of us are confronted with the most transcendent trial in the modern history of Peru.
Editor's Notes:
1. Popular festival organized around the preparation of chopped chicken, marinated with chili, garlic, among other condiments, and cooked in a pot or grill. Beer and happy music for dancing are other characteristics of these parties organized to raise money for some objective, generally from small neighborhood organizations.
2. “Chief” is a popular expression used to address a uniformed authority, usually the police
3. Words from Fujimori's message in all the media, with which he communicated his decision to close the Congress of the Republic in 1992. This expression became popular and frequently appears in Fujimori's cartoons in a humorous tone.
* This article is published under the San Marcos Foundation Agreement for the Development of Science and Culture of the Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos – Japanese American National Museum, Discover Nikkei Project.
© 2008 Antonito Zapata Velasco
