Aadel Collection
Report by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. Amos Wako, appointed pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40 of 30 May 1985
uNIT
NATIONS
Economic and Social
Council
E/CN .4/1986/21
7 February 1986
Oriqinalt ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON HUMM4 RIGHTS
Forty—second session
Agenda item 12 :
QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDANENTflL FREEDOMS
IN ANY PART OF THE WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL AND
HER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES
Summary or arbitrar ' exicutidns
Report by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. SoSW )II 6iifi .id
pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40 of
30 Miy 1985
8 6 1Q422/O223e O237e
Distr.
GENERAL
rafl : . !
. .
. . : 1 :
: :
; : [
E/ON.4/19$6/2 1
H : page ii
CONTENTS
[ Paragraphs Page
I INTRODUCTION 1 9 1
:: : [
: I. ACTIVITIES OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR 10 — 56 3
A. Consultations 11 3
B. Communications 12 20 3
1. Request for information 12 15 3
2. Allegations of summary or arbitrary !
executions 16—20 3
C. Urgent appeals to Governments 21 — 55 4
0. Joint hearings on southern Africa 56 17
II. SITUATIONS 57 — 145 18
A. Allegations communicated in 1984 62 — 97 19
1 B. Allegations communicated in 1985 98 — 145 40
: ! , III. ACUTE PHENOMENA REQUIRING PARTICULAR ATTENTION .. 146 - 207 89
: ! A. Killings in situations of internal armed
conflict 150 172 89
8. Excessive or illegal use of force 173 — 193 93
:‘ ! ! C. Deaths in custody 194 206 97
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 207 — 213 99
Annexes
I. Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40
II. General Assembly resolution 40/143
III. Note verbale dated 16 August 1985 from the Secretary—General to
Governments.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 1
INTRODUCTION
. OEe phenomenon of “summary or arbitrary executions” has been observed in
various parts of the world and at various stages of modern history since the
inception of the right to life as an inalienable right of man.
2. The present report is the fourth report of the Special Rapporteur since
he was first appointed in 1982 under Economic and Social Council
resolution 1982/35. In the past four years the Special Rapporteur has
submitted three reports to the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/1983/16 and
Md.l, E/CN.4/1984/29 and E/CN.4/1985/l7) and during that period considerable
developments have taken place with regard to the question of summary or
arbitrary executions. Awareness of the nature of the phenomenon of
non—respect for this most basic human right has increased significantly on
both national and international levels, and serious efforts have been made by
Governments and groups, both national and international, in regard to
information gathering and fact finding. This awareness has developed national
and international concern about the question of how to deal with the
phenomenon and what measures should be taken to combat this widespread human
problem. The Special Rapporteur is pleased to report IIat a number of
interesting suggestions have been brought before him in this regards this is
particularly important in view of the fact IIat IIe question of summary or
arbitrary executions only began to attract the attention of various
international forums as a distinct subject in the field of human rights a few
years ago.
3. On 30 May 1985, the Economic and Social Council adopted
resolution 1985/40 entitled “Summary or arbitrary executions” (see annex I),
On the recommendation of the Commission on Human Rights which adopted
resolution 1985/37 without a vote at its forty—first session, on 13 March 1985.
OEe General Assembly, at its fortieth session adopted resolution 40/143
entitled “Sunmary or arbitrary executions” (see annex II).
Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the
. ,‘Treatment of Offenders, held in Milan, Italy, from 26 August to
6 September 1985, dealt with the question of extra—legal, arbitrary and
. Sum.mar executions and adopted resolution 11 by consensus (A/CONF.12l/22,
PnI, sect. E and paras. 181—183, 185 (d) and 190).
‘ OEe present report is submitted pursuant to Economic and Social Council
1 9lution 1985/40 and is intended to inform the Commission of the activities
? :the . Special Papporteur during the past year, to update the information
: .; t1 4n1e,d in the previous reports, and to examine various situations in depth
view to pinpointing causes and probing possible means to put an end to
, rrence of summary or arbitrary executions. It may be noted that in
t att to paragraph 6 of Council resolution 1985/40 greater emphasis is
, ,,Ched to the Special Rapporteur's activities concerning cases in which
or arbitrary executions were alleged to be imminent or threatened.
, Accordingly, the Special Rapporteur has described in this report the
ions he received, which he duly communicated to the Governments
and has reproduced any replies addressed to hi m by those
r9 .,ents,. In doing this the Special Rapporteur has attempted to show the
the nature of the allegations and the views expressed thereon by
;
1'
I
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 2
the States concerned, thus giving an account of the situation of the right to
life as reported to him during the period covered by this report including,
where applicable, instances that arose during the previou reporting period,
i.e. 1984.
8. The information thus set out provides the global base for chapter II I in
which the Special Rapporteur draws what he considers to be classic paterns of
acute situations which, more than other circumstances, cause violations of the
right to life on a serious level. OEese situations are defined to illustrate
the phenomenon rather than to give an exhaustive description. They are
divided into the following: situations of internal armed conflict, excessive
H or illegal use of force and deaths in custody.
9. Finally, the Special Rapporteur gives his conclusions and
recommendations, which are based on the totality of the information before him.
::
;
I
I
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 3
I. ACTIVITIES OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
During IIe past year IIe Special Rapporteur has engaged in activities
that fall within the sphere of his mandate, as described below.
A. Consultations
The Special Rapporteur visited the Centre for Human Rights in July and
october/November 1985 for consultations and again in January 1986 to finalize
the report.
B. Communications
1. Request for inforstion
12. On 16 August 1985, a note verbale was sent to Governments seeking
information concerning the question of summary or arbitrary executions
(annex III). A letter was sent on the same date to specialized agencies,
intergovernmental organizations, United Nations bodies, liberation movements
and non—governmental organizations, seeking information concerning the
question of summary or arbitrary executions.
13. In the course of his present mandate, the Special Rapporteur received
replies from the Governments of Australia, Austria, Belize, Brunei,
Central African Republic, Chad, Denmark, Panama, Poland, Spain and the
Syrian Arab Republic.
14. A reply was also received from IIe Organization of American States.
: Replies were also received from the following non—governmental
: : organiz j g in consultative status with IIe Economic and Social Council:
k u -India Women's Conference, Amnesty International, International Commission
of Jurists, International Committee of the Red Cross, Inter—Parliamentary
)Unton, International Federation of Human Rights, Pax Romana, World Council of
- Churches
2 Allegations of summary or arbitrary executions
16 On 12 July 1985 letters were sent to 12 Governments concerning
a legatj 0 s of summary or arbitrary executions in their countries. On
4 July 1985 letters were sent to five more Governments
On 22 July 1985 letters were sent to 14 Governments which had not replied
the Special Rapporteur's letters sent in 1984 or before 1984, concerning
egat 0 of summary or arbitrary executions in their countries. On
OCtOb 1 . 1985 letters were sent to 23 Governments which had not replied to
Special Rapporteur's letters sent in 1985 and earlier concerning
,, 1 ega 0 5 of summary or arbitrary executions in their countries. In those
erg the Special Rapporteur again requested information on alleged cases of
or arbitrary executions which had previously been transmitted to the
—
I I Special Rapporteur received replies to the allegations from a number
ffl4Z ', 0 5e Governments and appreciated their positive co—operation with him
7 ),d .ng implementation of his mandate.
E/CN.4/1986/2].
page 4
19. However, IIe Special Rapporteur feels obliged to note that, despite the
reminders sent on 22 July and 15 October 1985, some Governments have not
replied to his request for information concerning allegations of summary or
arbitrary executions.
20. Replies were received from some of the Governments contacted in 1985, but
oIIers have not yet replied to the Special Rapporteur's request for
information concerning allegations of summary or arbitrary executions. The
Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that those Governments might need more
time to investigate the allegations, and IIat IIe replies already given by
Governments should be carefully examined, for this reason and in order to
assess the situations in the countries concerned he might require more time.
He therefore refrains in the present report from mentioning those Governments
and the allegations communicated to them in 1985, except IIe allegations of
consistent patterns of summary or arbitrary executions brought before him both
in 1984 and 1983, which are described in chapter I II.
C. Urgent appeals to Governments
21. The Special Rapporteur, in the course of his mandate, received
information containing allegations of imminent or threatened summary
executions which appeared prima facie relevant to his mandate. In this
context IIe Special Rapporteur addressed an urgent message by cable to the
Governments concerned and requested information on IIe allegation of imminent
or threatened cases of summary executions. Those Governments are: Angola,
Bangladesh, Democratic Yemen, Guatemala, Guinea, Indonesia, Iran
( Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jamaica, Liberia, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia and
South Africa.
22. Replies were received from the Governments of Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq,
Jamaica and South Africa.
23. OEe substantive parts of the messages of the Special Rapporteur and
replies from Governments concerned are reproduced below.
24. On 9 April 1985 a message was sent to IIe Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Angola:
[ Original: French]
“... My attention has been drawn to the allegation of possible execution
of a person sentenced to death by firing squad on 15 February 1985 by the
Regional Military Tribunal in Huambo. OEe name of the person was given
as Afonso Biebi. It was further alleged that the trial procedures did
not provide the right of defence nor the right of appeal.”
25. No reply has been received from the Government of A ngola.
26. On 10 December 1985 a message was sent to the Minister for Foreign
Affairs of Bangladesh; .
(Original: English ]
“... I have received information whereby the following two persons were
allegedly sentenced to death by the Special Military Court: Mohiuddifl, a
student aced 22. sentenc , d tn do, t1, r.n n,n-...$.— inn
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 5
student aged 16 or 17, from Mirpur, sentenced to death on 23 June 1985 by
Special Military Court in Dhaka on a charge of murder. It was alleged
also that no appeal to a higher tribunal was possible from conviction by
the Special Military Court.”
27. No reply has been received from the Government of Bangladesh.
28. On 18 November 1985 a message was sent to IIe Minister for Foreign
Mfairs of Democratic Yemen:
[ Original: Engish)
“... My attention has been drawn to the allegation of possible execution
of three persons. The names of IIose persons were given as
Ali Al—Sayyid Salih, Abdullah Ali Bashbil and iIIalid Abdullah Al-Ribati.
OEe information received alleges IIat IIe IIree have been sentenced to
2 deaII by IIe High Court of the People's Democratic Republic of Yemen
after being convicted on charges of treason. In addition, reference may
be made to allegations reaching me according to which the three persons
named above among a group of 11 Ba'athists were reported to have been
held in prolonged incommunicado detention prior to their trial, It was
further alleged IIat IIe trial procedure did not provide the right of
appeal.”
29 No reply has been received from the Government of Democratic Yemen.
H3Q• Three messagS were sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala
on 18 April 1985, 17 July 1985 and 1 November 1985:
Ca) 18 April 1985
tori ganal: English)
“ My attention has been drawn to information concerning abduction
H and/or disappearance of persons who were subsequently found dead. In
j particular, my attention has been drawn to the case of Carlos Ernesto
Cuevas Molina who was abducted by armed men in Guatemala City on
15 May 1984 and whose whereabouts are still unknown. His wife
Maria Rosario Gaday de Cuevas, her broIIer Mynor Godoy Aldana and her son
Augusto Rafael Godoy disappeared on 4 April 1985 and were later found
dead OEus I believe that IIere should be serious concern for IIe life
of Carlos Ernesto Cuevas Molina. Another case concerns a person whose
name was given as Joaquin Rodas Andrade. According to information
Joaqu n Rodas andrade was abducted by armed men on 2 March 1985 near a
H military garrison quote Manuel Lisandro Barillas unquote in
Guatemala City Military personnel in the immediate vicinity of the
abduction allegedly failed to intervene to prevent the said abduction.
; feel that these circumstances justify serious and legitimate concern that
IIe life of Joaquin Rodas Andrade might be in serious jeopardy.”
) 17 July 1985
[ Original. Spanish)
.. My attention has been drawn to information concerning the abduction
> on 18 June 1985 in Patzun, Chimaltenango, allegedly by military personnel
.
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 6
belonging to the detachment of Patzun, of a number of persons whose life
was feared in serious jeopardy. OEe names of those persons were given as
Juan Pablo Toj, Eustaqui Toj, Encarnaci6n Bay, Florinda Yos,
Juana Argip Coyote, Esteban Perez and Isabela Yos In view of earlier
allegations, such as those of the killing of 46 peasants in January 1985
in the hamlet of Xeatzan as well as the abduction of nine peasants in the
same village and of 125 peasants in April 1985 in the hamlet of
Santa anita las Canoas, San Marttn Jilotepecjue, Chimaltenango, I believe
that there should be serious concern for the life of the persons
reportedly abducted from Patzun. In addition, reference may be made to
allegations reaching me according to which IIe villagers of Patzun are
threatened with reprisals by the military detachment commander described
as a certain Captain Cabrera.”
Cc) 1 NovepIIer 1985
[ Original: Spanish]
. My attention has been drawn to information concerning the abduction
on 23 September 1985 in Guatemala City, allegedly by members of the
national police, of a person named C sar Ramos, whose life seems to be in
grave danger. According to the information received, Cgsar I amos was
allegedly wounded by a bullet in IIe head while in custody in
‘La Parroquia' police station. OEis event was allegedly described by the
police as a suicide attempt. Ramos was transferred to hospital, where he “
remain d under police guard. In view of similar allegations in the past
concerning patients who have disappeared or died after being abducted
from their hospital rooms, there should be serious concern for the life
of C&sar Ramos 0 .
31. A letter dated 22 July 1985, was received from the Permanent Mission of
Guatemala to the United Nations Off ice at Geneva:
(Original: Spanish ]
tt] wish to refer to your telegram of 17 July 1985 addressed to the
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guatemala.
Your presentation in this cable of a series of grave accusations
against my Government and its institutions compels me to approach you in
order to explain in writing and in as detailed a manner as possible their
nature and origin.
I am sure you are aware that Guatemala, situated in the centre of
the american continent, has been coverted against the wishes of the
Guatemalan people into a focus of attention and a scene of confrontation 7
between the geopolitical and geostrategic interests of the hegemonistic
super—Powers.
OEis has given rise to a situation in which since 1962 subversive c 4
factions professing the ideology of one of the above—mentioned parties
have been carrying out military activities — frequently of a terrorist 4
nature — in Guatemalan territory and among the Guatemalan people
. ‘
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 7
In this situation, many acts of violence have taken place in
Guatemala, responsibility for which — as part of the war of propaganda —
is regularly attributed by the subversives to Government institutions.
OEe investigations made, when these were possible, showed; however;
that many of IIese charges are fabricated by the subversives themselves
whenever there is a forIIcoming international event at which it suits
IIem to disparage Guatemala and its Government.
As you may see for yourself from IIe photocopied documents attached,
a military action carried out by subversive criminals of the self—styled
Revolutionary Armed Forces (FAR), involving the murder of 11 persons and
the abduction of a further 9 persons in December 1984 in the
JI1 ;Department of Chitnaltenago, was used by IIe subversives themselves as a
basis for levelling an accusation against my Government on the occasion
of the forty—first session of the Commission on Human Rights.
In response to the charge, my Mission presented to the
Assistant Secretary—General for Human Rights an explanatory note,
circulated as official document E/CN.4/l985/60, with which you are no
doubt familiar.
Many of the other accusations against my Government so lavishly
circulated at the international level by the subversives fall into a
similar category. Both the Special Rapporteur on Guatemala of the
Commission on Human Rights and oIIer prominent international figures
interested in establishing the veracity of IIe allegations of the
subversive organizations and their allies, have been able to prove IIis
by means of investigations in situ.
Since such accusations can be fabricated in their hundreds by IIe
subversives, and since their investigation and clarification require from
my Government an outlay of resources urgently needed for the solution of
oIIer social problems, it is necessary to consider whether it may not be
advisable for accusations of this kind to be accepted by the responsible
international organizations only when they are based on proofs judged
valid by the members of IIese organizations responsible for evaluating
them.
Requesting you to take all these factors into account in evaluating
any accusations which may be brought to your attention in future, since
this will largely determine whether an objective assessment can be made
of the real course of events in Guatemala . ..“
32. On 23 July 1985, the Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the
%tted Nations Of f ice at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur in connection
II IIe allegations contained in the messages.
A letter dated 14 January 1986, was received from the Permanent Mission
Guatemala to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
(Original: Spanish]
“ I have the honour to refer to your telegram dated 17 July 1985,
a< concerning information which has been brought to your attention.
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 8
In that respect, the Permanent Mission of Guatemala would like to
make the following comments:
(1) Abductions on 19 JunS l9B5 jtjPIItznjt, dhiii 1tenan 6
In its Note No. 1442/DR/US of 12 September, the Permanent Mission of
Guatemala informed IIe Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary
Disappearances that the persons who had been reported missing had
taken advantage of the amnesty and were now back in their homes.
OEese persons are:
Santiago Toj Chirix
Daniel Takera Muj
Esteban P&rez Tuxal
Alejandro Yoz Cum
Juan Tzay Eajam
Eugenia Yet Muy
Maria Aria Arcip Coyote and her two daughters:
(Florinda Yoz Arcip and Isabel Yoz Arcip)
Leona Sisajan Sac.
As you will see, some of these names are among those mentioned in
your telegram of 17 July.
(2) Massacre of 46 Indian peasants in January 1985 in Xe tIIn ill ,
Chimaltenango . :
In IIis connection, the Permanent Mission of Guatemala has submitted
a Note in explanation of the true events, to the Commission on
Human Rights, which was circulated as an official document of the
forty—first session of the Commission (E/CN.4/1985/60), and we
should like to refer you to that document again.
(3) Massacre of 125 peasIIs at the &nd bfAp2fil985 i th vifla e H
Santa Anita de las Canoas, San Martin Jilotepeque, Chimaltenango
In this connection, the Permanent Mission of Guatemala encloses a
detailed report on IIe alleged massacre, from which it may be seen. : :
that there was no massacre in the village in question, as had been
reported in IIe local press on 20 April 1985 and communicated to the
Special Rapporteur.
OEe Permanent Mission of Guatemala would be obliged if the
Special Rapporteur would take the above information into account when
drawing up has final report for submission to the Commission on
Human Rights at its forty—second session.
With reference to the allegations made in Note G/SO 214(33—3) of :...
12 July 1985, the Permanent Mission of Guatemala encloses a photocofl:
IIe forensic medical report of an autopsy carried out on the body 9 :4:
Rector Orlando G6mez Calito, which states that the cause of death was
‘internal haemorrhage due to ruptured liver'. “
34. Two messages were sent to IIe Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guinea.
r
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 9
(a) 10 July 1985
[ Original. English)
“... My attention has been drawn to the allegation of possible
execution of a number of persons ... allegedly responsible for a
attempt on 4 July 1985. It was further alleged that they might be
executed without trial.'
ib) 18 July 1995
[ Original: nglish)
“I have the honour to refer to my cable of 10 July 1985 ... I I I view
of the serious nature of the allegation and also the encouraging
statement of 7 July 1985 by President Conte in which His Excellency
reportedly invited quote IIose who wish to intervene in defence of human
rights to do so unquote, I earnestly hope that positive measures have
been or are now being taken in order to ensure that the safeguards set
out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
especially those concerning fair trial in article 14, are respected in
the above—mentioned case. I should be grateful ... to receive from
Your Excellency's Government any information on this case. Meanwhile, I
shall, remain at your disposal in case Your Excellency's Government may
wish to hold a constructive dialogue on matters concerning protection of
the right to life.'
35.. No reply has been received from the Government of Guinea.
36. On 3 June 1985 a message was sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs
of Indonesia ,
[ Original; English)
tt•.. My attention has been drawn to the allegation of possible
;.: . execution of three persons whose names were given as follows:
Ojoko Untung, Gatot Lestario and Rustomo. According to the information
. received IIe three were arrested in 1968 and 1969 in connection with an
? attempted coup on 30 September 1965 for which the Communist Party of
Indonesia was held responsible. OEeir appeal to the Supreme Court and
appeal for clemency to the President were rejected in 1983 and ig8 •
was further alleged that a person, whose name was given as
Mohajp Munir, was arrested in connection with the same attempted coup
and was executed on 14 May 1985, and that there were approximately
35 persons still under death sentence for alleged offences relating to
the 1965 coup attempt. It was also alleged that many of the trials in
Which those persons were sentenced to death were held in secrecy without
.Praor notice, that the accused were not given sufficient time to consult
with their court—appointed counsel, that little time was given to the
. :d1.f ,ndants or their counsel to cross—examine witnesses or to call
witnesses in their own defence, and that the conduct of the trials was
i.xapartiaiu
; -,press release, dated 22 July 1985, was received from the
flt Mission of Indonesia to the United Nations Office at Geneva which
.2 IIe following information on Mr. Munir ,
g/CN. 4/1985/21
page 10
[ Original English ]
‘‘
1. Although Munir was known as an avowed communist, yet the execution
was carried out not merely because he was a member of the outlawed
Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI), but IIe death sentence was passed on
him due to the unpardonable crime he had committed against the State and
people of Indonesia.
2. The passing of IIe death sentence on Munir and his collaborators has
gone through normal court proceedings in accordance with due process of
: 1 ; the existing Indonesian laws. The legal proceedings were carried through
court sessions open to the public and conducted through various stages of
courts based on the legal proceedings. Munir as well as the oIIers were
given the right to submit clemency to the President and it is the
constitutional prerogative of the President to grant or reject clemency
after having received the advice of the Supreme Court, the
Minister of Justice and the Attorney—General. OEus the carrying out of
the execution is but part of the normal legal process in a civilized
society, which has nothing to do with human rights issues or feeling of
: 1 ; revenge on the part of the Government of Indonesia against members of the
Communist Party, as claimed by certain quarters. .
3. OEe seemingly long delay of the carrying out of the execution was
due to the time needed by IIe judicative executive bodies in Indonesia to
ascertain that justice be really upheld in Munir's and other similar
cases.
. t , ,
38. It was reported that Djoko tJntung, Gatot Lestario and Rustomo were
executed between 1 and 3 July 1985.
39. On 9 April 1985 a message was sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
the Islamic Republic of Iran:
[ Original: English]
“... I also wish to refer to my cable of 29 August 1984 addressed to
Your Excellency concerning the allegation of possible execution of
32 persons. Subsequently 8 of the 32 persons were reported to have been
executed. Information was recently received IIat 3 of the 32 mentioned
above, whose names were given as Farid Ohalcirt, Mihran Tashakkur and
Vahid Qudrat, might be facing possible execution. While I have had
occasion to note the statements made by the representatives of the
Islamic Republic of Iran in the course of the forty—first session f the .
Commission on Human Rights, I nevertheless would like to reiterate my .
, . c and tO t ( t J
concern regarding the protection of the fundamental right to lite 77
request any information in your Government's possession on these caSe s ,
in particular concerning the safeguards applied in those cases.”
40. No reply has been received from the Government of the Islamic RePubl - .
Iran.
41. Two messages were sent to IIe Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iraq
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 11
(a) 24 $epteuIIet 1985
toriginal; English)
“... I should also like to recall my cable of 29 June 1983 addressed
to Your Excellency concerning execution of six members of the Al—Hakim
family on 19 May 1983 and my letter of 12 July 1985 addressed to Charge
d'affaires A.I. of Permanet Mission of Iraq in Geneva concerning alleged
execution of further 10 members of the same family, and 15 members of the
Kurdish Democratic Party and 3 members of the Assyrian Christian
Community in Iraq.
I have taken note with appreciation of notes verbales of 5 January,
7 November 1983 and 26 December 1984 from your Permanent Mission in
leneva conveying your Government's views on the subject of summary or
arbitrary executions. The note verbale of 7 November 1983 contained
information on the execution of the six members of the Al Hakim family on
13 May 1983 and stated that the execution of these six persons had taken
place after proper investigation and trial during which they benefited
from the legally prescribed safeguards including the right to legal
counsel. While reiterating my appreciation for IIe constructive approach
which has characterized your Government's attitude to my mandate I am
compelled to draw your attention to information which has now reached me
that may call into question the substance of the reply of Your
Excellency's Governmentp furthermore I am told IIat another member of
‘ the Al-Hakim family, Sayyid Muhammad Husain A1—Sayyid Muhammad ‘Alt , , ;
Al-Lakim, is said to have died in detention in the first week of
June 1985 as a result of torture or ill—treatment and that those members
of the three groups that were the subject of my letter of 12 July 1985
, had not been charged or tried before their execution. These allegations
have necessitated IIat I approach Your Excellency once more to seek the
appropriate clarifications and to transmit the serious concern that has
been expressed for the life and treatment of the members of those groups “
teld in detention, in particular members of the Al—Hakim family who were
rrested on 10 May 1983 and allegedly detained to date without charge . .“ : ifi
(b) 6 December 1985 ‘
[ Original. English]
“. I should like to bring to Your Excellency's attention that I
have received information whereby four persons whose names were given as
Husam AU. Na)im, Hazem Ali Najim, Haidar Ali and Saad Salem Youcif, were N
allegedly shown on the Iraqi television on 23 November 1985 with signs of
harsh treatment on their faces, confessing their planned attack on Iraqi
territory, was also alleged that these persons have been detained
incommunicado without access to a legal counsel and that no judicial
Proceedings concerning their case have been made public. In this
connection fear was expressed that the four persons might have been
. . ; ., ,exe Ut or might be executed shortly.
Without wishing to take any position on this information, I should
4 Very much appreciate it if Your Excellency could look into this matter
and provide me with any pertinent information Your Excellency may have as
g soon as possible should also appreciate it if I were to receive any
fl 4 Ormation on the cases of the Al—Hakim family members referred to in my : !‘
IviIr— le of 24 September 1985...” 1
E/cN.4/ 1986/21. .
page 12
42. A letter, dated 23 October 1985, was received from the Permanent Mission
of Iraq to the United Nations Office at Geneva, containing relevant
information on the cases referred to in the above mentioned cables. OEe
letter is reproduced in chapter I I, paragraph 121.
43. Two messages were sent to the Governor—General of Jamaica :
(a) 8 March 1985
. [ Original: English ]
“... My attention has been drawn to the cases of Louis Cooper and
Elijah Kerr who, according to the reports I have received, are facing
imminent execution. I would be grateful to Your Excellency if I could be
provided with auIIoritative information on these cases and would appeal
to Your Excellency to stay the execution for the time being.”
(Ill 7 June 1985
[ Original: English]
I wish to refer to my cable of 9 March 1985 addressed to
Your Excellency in which I requisted auIIoritative information on the
cases of Louis Cooper and Elijah Kerr who were allegedly facing imminent
execution. Recently I received information that new warrants have been
issued for the two persons to be executed on 11 June 1985 after stay of
execution was granted on 11 March 1985. I would still be grateful to
Your Excellency if I could be provided with information on these cases.”
44. OEe following letter from the Governor-General, dated 24 May 1985, was
received through the Resident Representative of the United Nations Development
Programme in Jamaica:
[ Original: English ] .
“... I write to acknowledge your letter of 9 March 1985, f 0 warding
telex from Mr. S. Amos Wako, Special Rapporteur of the Commission On
Human Rights on summary or arbitrary executions. , ,
I would wish you to inform him of my receipt of the telex i would
wish him also to be advised that the cases of Louis Cooper and
Elijah Kerr do not come under the heading of Summary of Arbitrary 2
Executions. .
OEey were found guilty of murder after having gone through the due 2!
process of law in long and well established legal procedures in
by way of a preliminary court inquiry by a judge then by a circuit
of judge and jurors, where they were found guilty and sentenced to be
hanged according to law.. OEey appealed and the appeal was aismissed b r
the Appellate Court of three judges.
The case was then taken on appeal to the Judicial Committee of t
Privy Council in England where it was dismissed by the learned Law LO
OEe Privy Council of Jamaica, a body over which I preside
advises me, gave the most careful consideration to the case on two
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 13
Since then further legal action was taken but IIe net result is the
same as at paragraph 5.
45. OEree messages were sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Liberia
on 23 August 1985, 18 November 1985 and 10 January 1986*
(a) 23 Au' ust 1985 .
[ originals English)
“... My attention has been drawn to information concerning the trial
by the Military Court of Ellen Johnson—Sirleaf, a civilian, who is tried
in cameS by the Military Court without legal assistance of her own
choosing on a charge of subversion. It is also alleged IIat if she is
.J found guilty execution may be carried out without delay. In this
connection I should like to refer Your Excellency to article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for
safeguards to ensure fair trails. Any capital punishment resulting from
trials conducted in a manner incompatible with the provision of
article 14 of the Covenant is p*ima facie considered as a violation of
the right to life, as is stipulated in article 6 of the Covenant:”. ,
18 November 1985
“ : [ original: English]
U• My attention has been drawn to information according to which,
as a result of recent events, a number of innocent civilians might have
been summarily executed and information indicating that the right to life
S , , : . of several others may be threatened. In this context may I recall my
urgent appeal in regard to Mrs. Ellen Johnson—Sirleaf, whose life, I am
given to understand, may once again be in jeopardy as may that of
Mr. Eyron Tarr, Mr. Tuan Wren and others...”
(cJ 10 January 1986
[ Original z English )
“I . refer to my message of 18 November 1985 .. . [ concerning) a
number of allegations according to which IIe life of a number of persons
may have been in jeopardy and [ expressing) the wish to receive any
information that your Government may wish to furnish in regard to [ these)
allegations.
I am currently in the process of completing my report to the
Commission on Human Rights scheduled to commence on 3 February 1986 and I
therefore hope that Your Excellency's Government may find it possible to
furnish any information relevant to my message of 18 November 1985. If
necessary, i am prepared to undertake direct consultations with your
Government for this purpose and would be ready to proceed to Morrovia at
an appropriate time should this be considered desirable...”
No reply has been received from the Government of Liberia
S3 4 April 1983 a message was sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
Arab Jamahiriya:
E/CN.4/l986/2 1
page 14
(Originals English]
“. ..My attention has been drawn to an allegation that a person whose
name was given as Fathi Ash Sha'iri was sentenced to death in
February 1983 and that he might be executed shortly. It was also allegea
that he was denied access to legal assistance and the right to appeal.
It was further alleged IIat a number of other individuals might also be
sentenced to be executed, some of them without trial.”
48. 14o reply has been received from the Government of the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
49. Two messages were sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Pakistani
(a) 4 March 1985
[ Original English]
“.. * wiII reference to my cable ref MSC 7495 of 9 November 1984, in
which I drew the attention of Your Excellency to the allegation of
possible execution of four persons whose names were given as
Abdul Nasir Baluch, Mohammad Essa Baluch, Saifullah Khalid Lashari Baluch !
and Mohammad Ayub Malik, further information was received that
Mohaminad Essa Baluch, Saifullah OEalid Baluch and Mohanimad Ayub Malik
have had their sentences commuted. However Abdul Nasir Baluch, whose
petition for clemency has been denied, is allegedly scheduled to be
executed shortly.”
(b) 8 March 1985
[ Original: English]
“. . My attention has been drawn to the allegation of possible
execution of one person whose name was given as Ayaz Samoo. According tO 9
this information Ayaz Samoo was sentenced to deaII on a March 1985 by
Special Military Court in Karachi on charges of murder. It was further 1
alleged that the trial was held in camera and that the trial proceedin 5
of the Special Military Court did not provide adequate safeguards to
protect the rights of individuals, in particular, the right to a fair and
public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal
established by law. It was also alleged that the confession which Sam
was said to have made under duress was accepted as evidence by the
Special Military Court.”
50. No reply has been received from the Government of Pakistan.
51. It was reported that Ayaz Samoo was executed on 26 June 1985 in the :
Karachi prison.
52. On 24 December 1985 a message was sent to IIe Minister for Forei9' I i
Affairs of Somalia:
COriginals tg1i5h1
“... I should like to bring to Your Excellency's attention that
have received information that a number of persons might be tried
National Security Court on charges of treason and conspiracy againstL
State under the National Security Law No.54 of Seotember 1970. In
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 15
connection fear was expressed that they might face immediate execution if
they were found guilty. Among IIose who might be tried by the National
Security Court on 25 December 1985, the following four names were given:
Omar Arteh Ghalib, Omar Haji Mohamed, Mohamed Aden Sheikh and
Mohamed Yusuf Weirah. Dates of trials of four others, whose names were
given as Asmail Ali Abokor, Osman Mohamed Chelle, Abdi Ismail Yunis and
Suleiman Nuh A u, were said to be as yet unknown.”
53. No reply has been received from IIe Government of Somalia.
54. ‘ Mo messages were sent to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of
SouII Africa :
(a) 20 August 1985
[ Originals English )
“... My attention has been drawn to information concerning IIe
scheduled execution by hanging on 21 August 1985 of Benjamin Moloise, who
was sentenced to death on 6 June 1983 by Pretoria Supreme Court after
having been found guilty of murdering a security police officer. The
information received has raised serious doubts in regard to the
proceedings of the trials in which Moloise was found guilty, in
particular as regards the resort to secret or lit camera proceedings.
OEis relates to article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, which provides for safeguards to ensure fair trials.
Any capital punishment resulting from trials conducted in a manner
incompatible with the provision of article 14 of the Covenant is
. prima facie considered as a violation of the right to life, as is
..‘. stipulated in article 6 of the Covenant...”
55. OEe following reply, dated 13 September 1985, was received from the
Permanent Representative of South Africa to the United Nations Office at
[ originali English)
“... I have been instructed by the competent South African
authorities to acknowledge receipt of telex No. 1339 sent by the Special
Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on summary or arbitrary
executions to the South African Minister for Foreign Affairs in regard to
. the sentence imposed by the Transvaal Provincial Division of the
. . . South African Supreme Court on 6 June 1983 on Malesela Benjamin Moloise.
.. You will doubtless recall that on S May 1983 Moloise was charged in
, , the Transvaa l Provincial Division of the Supreme Court of South Africa on
a charge of murder, in that on or about 7 November 1982 at or near
Mamelodi in the district of Pretoria North he wrongfully and willfully
caused the death of Phillipus Selepe, an adult black male. Selepe was a
,m ter of the South African Police. The prosecution alleged IIat Moloise
Opened fire and hit the deceased several times. The deceased died of
IflUltiple gunshot wounds At least eight bullets fired from the firearm
had entered his body.
On 18 February 1983, after his arrest by IIe Police, Moloise made a
orifession to a Magistrate in which he inter alia admitted to having shot
j he deceased at his house. The aforesaid confession was confirmed by
Iridloise on 31 March 1983 when he appeared in terms of section 119 of the
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 16
Criminal Procedure Act 1977, in IIe Magistrate's Court Pretoria NorII to
plead to the charge of murder. OEe case was subsequently referred to the
Transvaal Supreme Court for trial.
During his trial, Moloise denied having shot the deceased and his
defence was based on an alibi. The prosecution inter alia tendered
evidence of the deceased's brother—in—law who testified that he witnessed
H the shooting in front of the house. He was unable to identify the
assailant. Moloise's denial and alibi was rejected by the judge in his
H judgement.
H. On 6 June 1983 Moloise was convicted on his own confession as
confirmed in material respects by independent evidence.
On 14 SepteiSer 1983 IIe trial judge refused leave to Moloise to
appeal to the Appellate Division. Thereafter Moloise petitioned the
Chief Justice for the necessary permission. On 7 November 1983 leave to
appeal was refused by the Chief Justice. When pronouncing the sentence
the Trial Court judge found no extenuating circumstances to be present in
Moloise's favour and remarked inter'alia:
‘It is very clear from the evidence that the accused himself
H supplies the reason for this abhorrent deed of his, and that is
H . namely that he was requested or called upon by ANC, the people with
whom he had associated, who conveyed an order to him to eliminate an
innocent policeman, who as far as I can deduce from the evidence
before the Court was merely performing his duties, and in effect,
i i performed the function of an executioner when he shot the deceased.
H (translation)
Moloise was convicted of the common law crime of murder for which
, i. the supreme penalty is imposed if no extenuating circumstances are
found. The charge, in no way connected with South African security
legislation, is purely based on normal legal principles.
You also suggested in your telex that the information you have
received raised serious doubts in regard to secret or in camera
proceedings and that it relates to article 14 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides for safeguards to
ensure fair trials. , , . .
In this regard I have been asked to point out that:
H 1. Only one of the 18 witnesses testified in camera ;
‘. 2. The court record comprises 548 pages of which only 39 contain
in camera evidence; , .‘
3. The reason for the in camera hearing was to protect the person :
of this one witness. The witness was threatened and theref0
detained for his own protection. OEe defence had no object i01
‘to this part of the hearing being held in Sra . During the
in camera hearing, normal legal. procedures were followed:
4 Article 14, paragraph 1, of the International covenant on C1 7i.
and Political Rights makes provision for in camera aringS
t9
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 17
5. OEe Republic of South Africa's Criminal Procedure Act 51 of
1977 makes provision for iiicSIII hearings.
For IIe above—mentioned reasons it is felt that there was no
violation of article 14, paragraph 1, of the Covenant, as suggested by
Mr. Wako in his telex to IIe Minister for Foreign Affairs.”
(b) 6 December1985
[ Original : Englishi
“... I should like to bring to Your Excellency's attention that I
have received information IIat during IIe alleged attacks carried on 24,
25 and 26 November 1985 by IIe so—called vigilantes on residents of the
township of Huhudi in the NorIIern Cape, a person by IIe name of
Sylvestor Gasebue was allegedly dragged from a home and shot dead at
“ - ‘ point—blank range by one of the vigilantes on 25 November. Another
person by the name of OEomas Seitsang was assaulted by the vigilantes on
26 November and later found dead in IIe mortuary with bullet wounds. It
was further alleged that the vigilantes, including some community
counsellors, were acting under police protection and that no police
action was taken against the attackers nor was the eyewitness heard by
the police for deposition. In IIis context fear was expressed that life
of other residents of Huhudi might be in danger.”
0. Joint hearings'on southern Africa
56. The Special Rapporteur, together with the Chairman of the Working Group
of Experts on southern Africa, met in Lusaka, Zambia, for joint hearings on
southern Africa from 13 to 19 November 1985. OEe hearings were the outcome of
IIe consultations held between the Special Rapporteur and the Chairman during
the Working Group's emergency meeting in August 1985. On that occasion, the
Special Rapporteur and IIe Chairman shared the opinion that, in view of the
grvjty of the situation of human rights and increasingly serious allegations
6 )uman rights violations in South Africa and Namibia, in particular , .
a egatjons of the widespread disregard for the right, to life, it was of the , ! ‘
Utmost importance to obtain up—to—date and first—hand information. OEe
information obtained by the joint hearings is reflected in chapter III
(paras. 179—183 and 192—195).
, . [
1
E/CN.4/ 1986/21
page 18
II. SITUATIONS
57. The information received by the Special Rapporteur in the course of his
present mandate includes allegations of executions or deaths which may have
F taken place in the absence of the safeguards designed to protect the right to
life embodied in various international instruments, such as the International
F ! Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (arts. 4, 6, 7, 9, 14 and 15); the
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; the Code of Conduct for
F : Law Enforcement Officials and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (General Assembly
I F resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984), and the Safeguards guaranteeing
F protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty adopted by the
Economic and Social Council in resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984.
. 1 .:
5s. In 1984 the Special Rapporteur communicated to 21 Governments al1egatjo 5
of summary or arbitrary executions which might have taken place in their
countries. By IIe time the present report was completed, replies had been
received from 15 Governments.
59. OEose allegations which the Special Rapporteur has taken into
consideration concern: . .
(a) Actual or imminent executions:
(i) Without a trial,
(ii) With a trial but without ;
a. A fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and
impartial tribunal established by law,
b. Prompt notification of the charge against the accused,
c. The right to legal defence and counselling,
Li ) d. OEe right not to be compelled to testify against oneself or
confess guilt,
e. The right to appeal to a higher tribunal according to law,
f. The right not to be tried or punished again for an offence
for which the accused has already been finally convicted or
acquitted,
g. OEe right not to be held guilty of any criminal offence on
account of any act or omission which did not constitute a
criminal offence, under national or international law, at the
time when it was committed, and not to be subject to a
heavier penalty than the one that was applicable at IIe time
when the criminal offence was committed.
(b) Deaths which took place;
(i) As a result of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
during detention,
(ii) As a result of abuse of lethal force by police, military or any
other governmental or quasi—governmental forces,
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 19
(iii) As a result of assault by paramilitary groups under official
control,
(iv) As a result of assault by non—governmental groups.
60. In 1985, the Special Rapporteur communicated allegations of summary or
arbitrary executions to 17 Governments. Replies had been received from
11 Governments at the time of the completion of this report.
61. After having carefully examined IIe information received; the
special Rapporteur decided to request further information in regard to several
of these cases.
A, AllegationS communicatSdi t 1984
62. In his report to the forty—first session of IIe Commission on
Human Rights (E/CN.4/1985/17), the Special Rapporteur refrained from
mentioning specific allegations of summary or arbitrary executions
(see chap. III, paras. 63—72 of the report). OEe Special Rapporteur
considered that the Governments concerned might need more time to investigate
those allegations, as the majority of the Governments to which allegations
were communicated had not replied before the report was completed. By the
time the present report was completed most of those Governments had replied to
4 the allegations communicated in 1984, which the Special Bapporteur could IIen
examine. In some cases, IIe Special Rapporteur recognized positive efforts by
4 the Governments and decided not to seek further information. In some other
4 cases, Governments requested IIe Special Rapporteur to provide further details
on IIe allegations in order to make their investigation possible, and the
Special Rapporteur responded positively in the context of continuing his
co-operation with those Goverrments.
63. The following paragraphs reflect IIe allegations communicated to the
Governments concerned and the replies thereto which were the subject of the
Special Rapporteur's concern in addition to those cases pending from the
previous year. OEey appear in alphabetical order by country and they concern
the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights
designed to safeguard the right to life, namely, articles 4, 6, 7, 9, 14 and
64. The Special Rapporteur transm .tted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Afghanistan which reads as follows:
“A number of persons were reported to have been executed after
having been sentenced to death by a Special Revolutionary Court, without
the possibility of judicial appeal to a higher court
A number of names among those executed were given as follows:
: In September 1984
Modir Nasrat, Mohammad Nasim, Mohammad Akbar, Xhwaja Esma'il,
t4ohammad Wall, Ata Mohammed, Mohammad }4a'em, Ni'az Nohammad,
Mohammad Akbar, Mohammad Jofar, Habiborrahman, Chaghal Mohammad,
Mohammad Mahfuz and Habibollah.
Purthermore a number of other persons were sentenced to death by the
:..aame court in the same manner as in the above—mentioned cases.”
ft
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 20
65. No written reply has been received from IIe Government of Afghanistan.
However, the Special Rapporteur received a telephone communication from the
Permanent Mission of Afghanistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva
on 14 January 1986 to the effect that in Afghanistan IIere were no summary or
arbitrary executions.
66. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Brazil which reads as follows:
“A large number of persons said to be mainly peasants and labourers
were allegedly killed by police forces or persons hired for the purpose
in various parts of the country over a number of years as a result of
disputes on landownership. Union leaders and lawyers who were said to
have become involved in protecting peasants and labourers in these
disputes were also reported to have been among the victims.”
67. On 15 January 1986, the Permanent Representative of Brazil to the
United Nations Office at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur concerning the
above—mentioned allegation. During the visit the following, letter, dated
15 January 1986, was received:
tOriginal : English]
“
OEe lack of specificity in the allegations brought to the attention
of the Brazilian Government does not permit the Brazilian authorities to
try to give a precise reply, which might be helpful in clarifying
particular incidents.
However, being duly appreciative of the work undertaken by the
Special Rapporteur, the Brazilian Government wishes to present a few
observations of a general nature.
The Government is fully aware that tensions have developed in H
several areas of the country in connection with problems of land tenure ‘ ,
and that unfortunately these tensions have resulted in serious incidents,
with violence and loss of lives. , :, ‘
It is the determined policy of the Government not to allow such
violence to subsist and the action of the authorities is being conducted
along two lines.
Firstly, by intervening as promptly and as effectively as possible 4
to put an end to violence and to bring to justice those responsible for
illegal actions.
I
Measures were recently taken to increase the effectiveness of the
national tnsta.tutton entrusted with the protection of Human Rights, the
Council for the Defence of the Rights of the Human Being. Among these
measures was the creation of a particular section in the Secretariat ,
under the responsibility of a Special Rapporteur (‘defender'), to deal a
with instances of violence in rural areas. The Council will then be ifl
better position to focus its attention on these problems, so IIat , ‘ :
appropriate action can be taken by the Government.
Secondly, the Government has decided to tackle the problems of
1andn'wn rch1n nA ,laa ,..4t.1 ..4.,.... 4... ..1 ,. .. . ,. 4,, ,.,hicb: ‘
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 21
. 0 nvinced
tensions arise, leading to acts of violence. OEe Government is C
that the implementation of the recently adopted National Plan for
Agrarian Reform will be an important contribution to the achieve111 ht
that goal. It is its intention to work steadily and resolutely to t a
end.”
68. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations rec 1
in regard to Chad, which reads as followst
“In September 1984 a number of persons, civilian non_combat3d
were suspected of opposition to the Government, were reportedly
Moyen—Chari and Logone Occidental prefectures in southern Chad by,
Government troops, including an incident of 27 September at Deli ‘ f the
Logone Occidental prefecture in which a number of former opponent S
) Government were allegedly executed by Government troops.
In several of such cases killings were allegedly carried oUt
indiscriminately as random reprisals.”
69. No reply has been received from the Government of Chad.
ceived
70. OEe Special Papporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations re
in regard to Colombia, which reads as follows.
“A number of persons were allegedly killed by the army, po1 - or
paraa'Llitary forces in particular, in the areas where guerrilla grouP
were reported to be active. OEe number of persons tilled between
August 1982 and May 1984 was said to be in the region of 900.
victims reportedly included peasants, human rights , u&.
leaders and a number of those who had been released as a result 0 f
amnesty law in November 1982 and, in all cases, they were report y
unarmed civilians. According to an official communiqu& issued o P
20 February 1983, the Attorney—General had made a report on the
participation and responsibility of security forces in extra—le9 d to a
killings with recommendations for appropriate legal action in
number of members of the forces concerned.”
71. OEe following letter, dated 30 October 1984, was received from tile
Permanent Mission of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Geneva'
[ Original:
‘‘
As you know, Colombia is governed by a rule of law which iS
exemplary in many respects the means of democracy are availab l 6 '
including the right of opposition and respect for the fundamenta'
freedoms of citizens in accordance with our legal system and the
international agreements which the country has signed.
I believe it is highly relevant to draw to your attention i 3 Y g
Official capacity the proposal adopted by consensus at the 34th of
of the Sub—Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and prote Ct Ofl
Minorities held on 29 August 1984. OEe proposal related to the anineY
law and the process of peace, reconcilitation and rehabilitatio f l 0
rebels set in motion by the Colombian Government.
I
E/CN.4/1986/ 2 l
page 22
As you can see, the independent experts on IIe Sub—Commission
considered not only that the Government of Colombia deserved commendation
for this law and this process but also that ‘this valuable precedent
should be- encouraged, since it progressively transforms a process of
conflict into a momentum for peace, creating conditions for national
reconciliation, inasmuch as it takes into account not only the effects
but also the economic and social causes of the situation'.
May I respectfully suggest that you should take this precedent into
account in arriving at a position on IIe situation in Colombia and should
proceed accordingly, allowing a reasonable period of time for the amnesty
and reconciliation process to bear fruit.
I take this opportunity to renew to you the assurances of my highest
consideration. In any event, I am forwarding your letter of 24 october
to my Government out of a desire to co—operate with you in your task. t '
72. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Honduras which reads as follows:
“During 1983, several persons were alleged to have been killed for
what were described as political motives. OEe majority of the victims
were political or trade—union leaders, who, days before being
assassinated, had publicly alleged that they were being pursued by
government security forces. It was furthermore alleged IIat IIe
perpetrators of the crimes travelled in vehicles without license plates
and carried arms that were only available to the army or security forces.
OEe following are some of the cases reported '
Herminio Deras who died on 29 January 1983 in a street in the
neighbourhood of Las Flores de San Pedro Sula;
Ovidio Santos who died on 10 March 1983;
Dagoberto padilla and a number of other persons who died on
29 March 1983 in the Aldea El Bglsamo, City of El Progreso,
Department of Yoro ;
Juan Patr6n Frish who died on 28 February 1983 in the
Hospital Escuela de Tegucigalpa;
Jos Bustamente and three of his broIIers who were killed after
being taken from IIeir homes in San Esteban, Department of 0lancho
on 18 April 1983;
Jos Luis Alvarez Rivera who died on 1 June 1983 in a private cliniC
in El Progreso, Department of Yuro;
Margarita L6pez who died on 11 February 1983 in the zone of
Guanchias, Department of Yoro ;
Jos& Leonel Chevez, a citizen of Nicaragua, who died on 28 June l9
in the police station at San Pedro Sula;
Jos& Angel Pinto Palencia who died on 10 March 1983 in the toWn
Ocotepeque “
-. -
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 23
73. The following letter, dated 15 January 1986, was received from the
permanent Mission of Honduras to the United Nations Of fice at Geneva:
[ Original: spanish )
“... in this Note I have the honour to reproduce the text of a teleX sent
care of this Mission by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Honduras which
reads as follows:
‘Re your telex 005 concerning the communication of the
special Papporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on Summary or
Arbitrary Executions, the Government of Honduras reaffirms its ,
willingness to continue its efforts to resolve the cases reportet 3
, . .
74. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of IIe allegations received
in regard to Indonesia, which reads as follows:
“lUlling of a number of persons by security forces reportedly
continued to take place as in 1983 in connection with an anti—crime
campaign, especially in Jakarta and West Java. OEe total number of
people killed since the beginning of the campaign in April 1983 was
estimated at between 4,000 and 8,500.
“In East Timor in 1983 and 1984 a number of persons were reported to
have died in custody or to have been executed after trials which
allegedly did not provide safeguards to protect IIe right to life of
individuals. Also a large number of civilians, mostly unarmed, were
reportedly killed by IIe army. FurIIermore, two persons were reported to
have been killed in detention in the Irian Jaya police station in
Jayapura in April 1984. OEeir names were given as Arnold Ap and
Edward Mofu. Another person, whose name was given as Azer nemoteka - Wa
reported to have died as a result of torture in February 1984 after beifl9
abducted and detained by an Indonesian paraco ndo unit.
7 5 . The following letter, dated 10 January 1985, was received from the
Peroe nent Mission of Indonesia to the United Nations Of fice at Geneva.
[ Original, English)
: . . : “ ‘‘‘. a
1. As regards the alleged killings in 1983 by security forces in the
connection with an anti—crime campaign referred to an your letter and
annex, the Indonesian Permanent Representative has provided adequate
clarification in his letter number 141/POL—040/84 dated 24 January
mentioned in your letter Ne have no furIIer information to add except
that there has been no more incidence of mysterious killing since 1984.
This could be seen as the outcome of effective preventive measures
L- -undertaken by the Government to put an end to such killings.
1L 2. OEe allegations mentioned in the annex of your letter IIat in 1983
CTafldTl984 a number of persons died in custody or had been executed aftel
trials which allegedly did not provide safeguards to protect the ri 1tt 0
4fe of individuals, and that a large number of civilians were repottS Y
killed by the army are simply untrue. They are part of a malicious h
mpaign to discredit Indonesia waged by certain elements opposed tO t e
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 24
decision of the majority of the East Timorese to integrate with
Indonesia. Due process of law for each and every Indonesian, including
East Timorese, is guaranteed by the Constitution and the law. To date
IIere are 79 persons who have been sentenced by the District Court
in Diii (Court of First Instance) to prison terms on being found guilty
of charges under article 110, paragraph 1, together with article 106 of
the Penal Code (involvement in a conspiracy aimed at subjugating the
whole or a part of the territory of the State to foreign government or
for the purpose of seceding a part of the territory of the State). OEey
are at present serving their prison terms in Diii and other places in
Indonesia.
4
3. Arnold Clemens Ap, the former Curator of the Museum of Anthropology
of the Cendrawasih University in Jayapura, Irian Jaya, was detained on
30 November 1983 for his suspected involvement in subversive activities.
On 22 April 1984, together with other detainees of the same category,
including Edward Mofu, he escaped from the place of detention after
overpowering the prison guards and seizing their weapons. Their attempt
to escape by sea ended in failure and Edward Mofu was drowned in the
attempt. Arnold Ap was killed in a shoot-out with the police in
H Pasir Enam, Jayapura on 26 April 1984. The report that Azer Demotekai
died as a result of torture in February 1984 is false. No case involving
a person by IIe name of Azer Demotekai is on the records of the
Indonesian Government.
It is our sincere hope that the foregoing comment will clarify the
matters referred to in your letter and will enable you to prepare an
objective report for the benefit of the Commission on Human Rights
76. The Special Rapporteur met IIe representative of the Government of 17
Indonesia on 22 October 1985 and IIe Permanent Representative of Indonesia to 7
the United Nations Of fice at Geneva on 16 January 1986. At both meetings it
was confirmed that IIe killings connected with the crime, which the Government ‘:7'
attributed to conflicts vn.IIin the criminal bands, had been drastically
reduced and was virtually non—existent The Special Rapporteur was also told
of the understanding between the Government of Indonesia and the
, ! International Committee of IIe Red Cross on an arrangement for tracing missing
persons.
77. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to the Islamic Republic of Iran, which reads as follows:
“A number of persons were reported to have been executed secretly or
publicly without any trial or after trials which did not provide
safeguards to protect the rights of the defendant The total number of
,: executions in the Islamic Republic of Iran since June 1981 to date was 74,
said to be 40,000. 1
“It was alleged that among those executed 10,231 persons were
identified. Among those identified there were reportedly 430 persons d
under 18 years old, 15 children and 18 pregnant women. Among the lleg 5 IS
victims were a number of Baha' and members of the Tudeh party.”
78. No reply has been received from the Government of the Is1 ic RepubliC o
Iran.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 25
79. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, which reads as follows:
“Eight persons were reportedly hanged in various locations
throughout the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya between 3 and 10 June 1984. OEey
were reportedly executed without a trial, following a decision by the
Basic People's Congresses.
The names of those executed were given as follows:
1. Sassi Ali Sassi Zikri, hanged on 3 June in Nalut Central,
2. Abmad Ali Abmad Sulayman, hanged on 3 June in Nalut Central;
3. Mohammad Said Al Shaybani, hanged on 4 June in Tamzin;
4. Othman A u Al Zarti, hanged on 5 June in Souk Al Juma';
5. Assadeq flamed Al Shuweihdi, hanged on 5 June in Birkah, Benghazi;
6. Al Mehdi Rajab Abdel Salam, hanged on 7 June in Tobruk;
7. Abdel Ban Oman Mansour Fannoush Al Mijbini, hanged on 7 June in
Jalu ;
8. Farhat Aimnar Hlab, hanged on 10 June in Zuwarah.
OEe executions of Assadeq Hamed Al Shuweihdi and Othman A u Al Zarti
were alleged to have been carried out within an hour of their arrest.'
. . 80. No reply has been received from the Government of the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya.
81. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Nigeria, which reads as follows.
“During 1984 in various states of Nigeria, a number of persons were
reportedly executed after having been sentenced to death by the Special
Tribunals established under Supreme Military Council Decree No. 5, the
Robbery and Firearms (Special provisions) Decree, 1984, issued in
March 1984. OEe procedure of these Special Tribunals allegedly did not
permit the convicted persons the right to appeal.”
F ; 82. OEe following letter, dated 20 March 1985, was received from the
Permanent Mission of Nigeria to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
[ Original: English]
F IT
. .
.
Trials of persons accused under Robbery and Firearms (Special
t et. Provisions) Decree No. 5 of 1984 is neither summary nor arbitrary as the
decree contains in the schedule thereto elaborate rules of procedure
t which guarantee to both the prosecution and the defence egual rights of
: audience, exanu.nation in chief and cross—examination. The accused may
also defend himself in person or through a legal practitioner of his own
choice. As regards composition of a tribunal constituted for the trial
z;.0f persons accused under the decree, such tribunal is, by provision of
‘tF F F...
E/CN .4/l986/21
page 26 .
section 6, presided over by a hi h court judge. Should an accused person
be found guilty and convicted by tribunal, sentence shall not take effect
or be carried out unless confirmed by the Military Governor of the state
concerned who may confirm or disallow the conviction as the facts and
circumstances of the particular case may warrant. In this regard,
instances abound of cases in which a Military Governor has commuted a
death sentence or has remitted a term of imprisonment or has even
completely disallowed a conviction and released the accused person.
Consequently, it becomes very clear that Robbery and Firearms Decree 1984
contains adequate provisions to guarantee the fair hearing of a case
against an accused standing trial thereunder and for the review of the
decision of a tribunal set up for the trial of robbery on firearms cases.
In the light of the above, it is the candid opinion and conviction
) of the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that the allegations
of IIe denial of the right of appeal under Decree No. 5 are groundless.
OEe Decree operates in total conformity with the relevant provisions of
the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights, in particular
with article 14, paragraph 5, of the Covenant which provides for the
right of appeal to a higher tribunal against a sentence.
Finally, I wish to assure you of the readiness of my Government to
co—operate with you, to the best of its ability in carrying out the
mandate given to you at any time you seek that co—operation 4 “
83. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Pakistan which reads as follows.
“A number of persons were reported to have been executed after
having been sentenced to death by special military courts in various
parts of the country. OEe procedures of IIe court allegedly do not
embody legal safeguards to protect certain rights of the defendant, such
as the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and
impartial tribunal established by law, the right to have adequate time
and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to communicate with
counsel of his own choosing and in particular the right to appeal to :
higher court. Furthermore, it was alleged that the Provisional :
Constitution Order of 1981 prohibited the civilian court from reviewing
any action taken by a military court or by the martial law
administration.”
84. The following letters, dated 14 November 1984 and 10 January 1985, were
received from the Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the United Nations Off ice
at Geneva:
(a) 14 November 1984
[ Original: English]
‘‘
I wish to inform you that the allegations contained in the anfleXu
received with your letter under reference are unfounded. To put the
record straight I would like to state that IIe military courts were
powers to. try cases of the violation of Martial Law Orders and Martial
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 27
Law Regulations as well as sante heinous cases under the normal laws.
Cases under the normal laws were transferred to the military courts
because of general demand made by the public for the reason that trials
in ordinary courts take a longer time to conclude than in military
courts. However, the establishment of these military courts has not in
any way materially affected the normal functions of the civil courts as
only a few cases of a heinous nature are referred to military courts.
It is incorrect to suggest that trials by military courts are devoid
of fair process. OEese courts, while trying cases, observe normal
judicial norms necessary for the administration of justice. The accused
has the right to be heard personally as well as by a lawyer of his own
choice who appears as next friend. He can cross—examine the witness and
argue on points of law and fact. The proceedings are in public and can
he witnessed by anyone subject to the availability of space in the court
room. There is also a right of appeal to the designated Martial Law or
)ub-Martial Law Administrators and in a fairly large number of cases such
• appeals have been accepted and the sentences were either quashed or
reduced. ‘
I I) 10 January 1985
lOriginal i English]
As promised I am forwarding the following for your information:
ii) Setting up and composition of Military Courts;
(ii) Our reply to the written statement of the World Peace
Council at the last session of the.Human Rights Commission;
(iii) Programme of elections and return to civilian rule;
(iv) Reply to the claims of persecution of the
Ahmadiyya Community (lIImadyya Community was written on the
small piece of paper you gave me).
‘SETTING UP AI4D COMPOSITION OF MILITARY COURTS
There are two classes of Military Courts, i.e. the Special
Military Courts and Summary Military Courts which have been
exercising criminal jurisdiction after the promulgation of martial
law in the country. According to Martial Law Order No. 4 of 1977
the Special Military Court is convened and constituted in the same
manner, exercises the same powers and follows the same procedure as
that of a Field General Court Martial convened and constituted under
the Pakistan J .rmy Act 1952. Section 87 of the Pakistan Army Act
- provides that a Field General Court Martial should consist of not
less than three officers. However, as laid down in the
above_mentioned w o, any person exerctstng the power of a Magistrate
r i of the First Class or of a Session Judge may be appointed a member
of the Coun and it is not necessary that the prosecutor should be a
person subject to the pakistan Army Act 1952 but any officer of the
Aflited Forces of Pakistan or of the Police Force or a Public
t 1t0r or a lawyer who can be appointed as a prosecutor.
—— - . .
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 28
Similarly, a Summary Military Court exercises the same power
and follows the same procedure as the Summary Court Martial held
under the Pakistan Army Act 1952 and the provisions of that Act and
rules made thereunder apply to and govern such proceedings, provided
that section 88 of the Pakistan Army Act 1952, which provides that
the proceedings of a Summary Court Martial shall be attended by two
of ficers or two junior commissioned officers or one officer and one
junior commissioned officer, shall not apply to a Summary Military
Court established under martial law.
As to the appearance of the counsel on behalf of the accused
H before the Summary or Special Military Court it may be pointed out
that under Rule 23 of the Pakistan Army Act Rules 1954 an accused
person is afforded proper opportunities of preparing his defence, is
H allowed free communication with his witnesses and with any friend,
defending officer or legal adviser whom he may wish to consult and,
H : subject to the aforesaid rules, counsel is allowed to appear on
behalf of the accused.'
‘EXTRACT FROM A REPLY BY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF PAXISTAN TO
THE FORTIETH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS,
REGARDING A STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE WORLD PEACE COUNCIL
(E/CN.4/l984/NGO/9)
... May I now refer to IIe written statement submitted by IIe
World Peace Council. We categorically reject the charges as
. H contained in document E/CN.4/1984/9 dated 9 February 1984. OEe
: allegations concerning the arrests of thousands of political
prisoners are completely without foundation and have been repeatedly
refuted by my Govenunent. Political prisoners listed in the
document, including Mrs. Bhutto are all free. OEe small number
still under detention by reason of having committee criminal
of fences remain under detention as they have been convicted by
courts of law. OEey are not targets of political victimization.'
‘PROGRAMME OF ELECTIONS M D RETURN TO CIVILIAN RULE
During the referendum campaign in December 1984, the President
stated that elections to the National and Provincial Assemblies
would be held in accordance with his 12 August 1983 plan, the
process being completed by 23 March 1985. By IIat date the
Constitution, which is presently held in abeyance would be
promulgated, civilian administration installed and martial law
lifted. When that happens the martial law courts would cease to
function and martial law regulations would be withdrawn.'
‘PAKISTAN'S REPLY TO THE ALLEGATIONS OF PERSECUTION MADE BY
THE AHMADIYYA COMMUNITY IN PAKISTAN
OEe allegations made by some members of the Ahmadiyya comntunitY
deserve examination in their historical and socio-economic
perspective. It was in 1974 after an extensive debate in the
National Assembly and after careful consideration of all points 0
view, including those presented by the leaders of the Abmadiyya
community, that a decision was reached by the Parliament to declare
the Ahmadiyya community a non-Muslim minority. Despite the
National Assembly's decision, the members of the Ahmadiyya comLflUflht '
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 29
continued to preach and propogate their beliefs under IIe name of
Islam which created tension and increased IIe possibility of
conflict thus threatening above all their own security. The
Government of Pakistan accordingly decided to promulgate the
Anti—Islamic Activities of the Qadiani Group, Lahori Group and
Ahmadis (Prohibition and Punishment) Ordinance 1984, which, besides
restraining the 2IImadiyya community from carrying out activities
prejudicial to Islam, also provides for the protection of IIeir
rights. Under the ordinance they are free to practice their beliefs
and IIere has been no compulsion to change their religion. OEe law
only prevents IIem from preaching and propagating their beliefs as
Islamic. The members of the community enjoy the same rights and
privileges as any other citizen or group in the country. OEey
continue to participate fully in IIe affairs of the country, some of
them holding senior positions in the Government.
OEe rights of the Ahmadiyya community as a minority are fully
protected and allegations of their disenfranchisement, removal from
high government posts, denial of promotions to higher ranks,
non—admission to universities or other institutions of higher
leaning are totally unfounded. The Government has taken full
measures to protect their life, property and places of worship.
OEere have been no cases of any maltreatment or victimization of the
Ahmadiyya community for reasons of their belief.
OEe communications of the Ahmadiyya community forwarded by IIe
Secretary—General themselves admit that “there has not yet been any
widespread execution of the Ordinance . ..“ and the contents of the
communications do not allege or indicate “gross and consistent
violation of human rights”. It must be stressed IIat the consistent
endeavour of the Government is to defuse rather than exacerbate any
tension between the Ahmadiyya community and other sections of
society and it is well known that no incident of any significance
resulting in loss of life or property has been reported. ‘
The Ordinance promulgated by the Government of Pakistan has a
historical perspective and is in continuation of the 1974 National
Assembly decision. The basic purpose of the Ordinance is to curb
any anti—Islamic activities which could hurt the sentiments of
society in general and could lead to creating tension between
various sections of society. The Ordinance provides full legal
protection to the life, honour and property of the Ahmadiyya
community as to the other minority communities. All constitutional
documents since Pakistan's independence in 1947 contain provisions
ensuring the rights of minorities
OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
regard to Peru, which reads as follows:
“In August 1984 a number of corpses were reportedly found in mass
, grav 3 at Pucayacu, Huanta, Ancojasa and Pucayacu Gorge in the Ayacucho
9gion. Some of IIe corpses were allegedly identified as the bodies of
5e who had disappeared after being detained by security forces, and
jre sa id to have been mutilated and to have shown signs of torture.
Furthermore, a person whose name was given as Jesfts Oropeza Chonta
t'o tedly found dead on 10 August 1984 after having been detained by
a&i q nf a4... ,i ,..j. .. . U
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 30
86. OEe following letter, dated 12 November 1984, was received from the
Permanent Mission of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
. [ Original: Spanish)
‘i.. .1 should point out that Peru has consistently attached special
importance to the problem of summary or arbitrary executions, in whatever
country they might occur, and that my Government values and reiterates
its great appreciation of your work in IIis area.
“With regard to the cases referred to in the documentation sent by
you to the competent Peruvian authorities, I should inform you that the
Executive, the legislature and the judiciary have taken steps, within
their respective areas of competence, to bring the facts to light.
Appropriate steps have also been taken by the Attorney—General as the
ombudsman is known in Peru.
OEe population is co-operating to the full in shedding light on
these allegations. In addition, the information media, in reporting on
the matter, are exercising the very broad freedom of expression which, as
the international community is aware, exists in Peru. .
In April next year, the people of Peru will be called upon once
again to vote in general- elections, thus exercising the right of full
participation in national political affairs. In this connection, it is
worII recalling that the conduct of the last municipal elections in Peru,
at the end of November 1983, was universally hailed as a genuine .
demonstration of the climate of democracy prevailing in Peru. As a
result, the Municipality of Lima became the first South American capital
to have a Marxist mayor elected by popular suffrage. It is against this
background of democracy existing in Peru that the allegations to be
investigated — allegations which relate to the Ayacucho region — should
be seen.
It must be borne in mind that there are cases in which it is
difficult to arrive at any identification of individuals since there are
segments of the population, principally in rural areas far reoved from
urban centres — as in the case of Ayacucho — about whom no information is
recorded in the appropriate civil registers. Since this frequently
hinders investigations, it would be most helpful if you could provide the
Peruvian authorities with specific information on the persons said to
have been involved in the alleged summary executions.
It is also worth noting that the existence in Peru of the democratic tj
system in respect of the separation and independence of powers does not
allow the Peruvian Government to intervene in cases which fall within the
jurisdiction of the judiciary. I
Despite the difficulties involved, the Government is doing its
utmost to co—operate with you further, and will continue to do so, in
order to shed light on the allegations of summary executions.
Accordingly, a list is attached which will provide you with a further
insight into the allegations in question.
In addition, for your information, I attach copies of the followin9
documents :
E/CN. 4/1986/21
. page 31
(1) Official communication on events in Pucayacu;
(2) Official communication on the case of Mr. Jes6s Oropeza Chonta;
(3) Copy of note No. 39, of 21 August 1984, sent by this Mission to
the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, concerning
the case of Mr. Jesus Oropeza Chonta ;
(4) Official communication on the use of uniforms of the forces of
law and order by terrorists 7
(5) Statements by the Minister of the Interior published in the
newspaper El Peruano on 23 october 1984;
(6) Clipping from the periodical Oiga , of 20 August 1984,
concerning the massacre carried out in Sachabamba by terrorist elements;
and
(7) Statements by the Deputy Prime Minister of IIe Republic, on the
massacres carried out by terrorists and the case of Mr. Oropeza Chonta.”
86. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received . ,
in regard to the Philippines, which reads as followss
Tifl was alleged that a number of persons had been killed mostly in
urban areas by law enforcement agents of the Philippine auxiliary police
known as ‘secret marshals' since August 1984. OEose agents were said to
have been given licence to shoot suspected criminals in connection with
an anti—crime campaign.
Furthermore, incidents of killing of civilians by armed forces and
paramilitary groups reportedly occurred in various regions of the
Philippines, and particularly in Mindanao. At least 384 such cases were ‘ ;
reported for 1983 and 108 cases during the first half of 1984. In a
number of cases the victims were arrested first by IIe armed forces and
later found dead, often reprotedly showing signs of torture Some of }
those cases which allegedly occurred an 1984 are listed as follows:
Benjamin ybanez, 33, who was shot dead on 23 June 1984 by members of
the Scout Rangers in Buenavista, Agusan del Nofle 7
;: ,
Pepito Deheran, La.to Cabrera and Rolando Castro who were said to L
, .,, have been tortured and killed on 31 May 1984 after being arrested on
28 May 1984 by soldiers of the Philippines constabulary in
Pingeles Caty
Ronelio Clarete, 21, Ronelio Evangelio, 24, Ismael Umali, 26, who
were found dead on 31 March 1984 in Silang, Cavite; they were said
; “ ‘ ; to have been the object of surveillance and harassment by security
forces,
kitonao Oyas, 24, Eulogio Aximar, 27, Mario Jamin, 19,
Rodolf o Jamin, 18, Aifredo Mui ez, 18, Abundio Aldaya, 23,
Armando Guillermo, 17, Alejandro Guillermo, 22, Viviano Fajardo, who
Were arrested in Tambo, South of Inayawan by the Philippines
constabulary on 14 May 1984 and were shot dead on the same day.
Some of the bodies were said to bear signs of torture;
___ .
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 32
Eddie Almonte, 18, Francisco Bulacan, 21, Pedro Callenero, 28,
Semion Dagape Jr., 19, Poping Damar Jr., 18, Ricardo icipkipan, 26,
and Cenon Lage, 22, who were reported missing in Tunango, Butuan
City on 17 March 1984 and on 11 April 1984 the decapitated bodies
were found in shallow graves at the camp of the 36th Infantry
Battalion of the 4th Infantry Brigade of the Philippines )rmy.”
88. OEe following letter, dated 26 January 1985, was received from the
Permanent Mission of the Philippines to the United Nations Office at Geneva :
(Original: Eng].ish
“I have the honour to refer to your letter dated 24 October 1984,
requesting information on a reported summary execution, quoted hereunder 1
‘...on 14 May 1983, a seminarian whose name was given as
Asagani Valle, was killed in Buenavista, Agusan de Star, by members
of the local police force. His body was allegedly exhumed on 24 May
after the family received an anonymous letter about his death.'
In response to your request, I have the honour to submit the
following information from the Philippine Governmenti
‘On or about 16.30 h of 14 May 1983, at Barangay Agonggong,
Buenavista, Agusan del Norte, a police patrol led by
TSg. Manuel Meis, Acting Station Commander of Buenavista Station of
IIe Integrated National Police, encountered armed men and as a
result thereof, IIree of the armed men identified later as Romeo
alias Prank, alias Commander Dimas, Mario Daguan and Isagani Valle
alias Dayan were killed. Recovered from the scene of encounter were
two magnum revolvers, cal. 22 and 11 rounds of live ammunition and
subversive documents and leaflets. OEe three were connected with
, the underground movement and were the principal suspects in the
killing of three members of the integrated Civil Home Defence force,
in 1981.
No case was filed in court considering that the deaII of Valle
and his companions was the result of an armed encounter. OEe police
team was in the actual performance of duty.'
I hope that the foregoing information will be taken into
consideration in the preparation of your report to the
forty—first session of the Commission on Human Rights scheduled in Geneva
from 4 February to 15 March 1985.”
89. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Sierra Leone, which read as follows:
“A number of persons were reported to have died in detention in l98 3T i
and early 1984 in Pujehun prison and in I coindu prison due to malnutrit10m
and serious undernourishment.” ‘ “ ,
90. No reply has been received from the Government of Sierra Leone.
A
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 33
91. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
jn regard to Sri Lanka, which reads as follows:
“In 1984 two incidents allegedly occurred in which civilians were
killed by the security forces. On 28 March at Chunnakam eight persons
were reported to have been killed as a result of random shooting by air
force personnel. Inquest proceedings were waived on all of the deaths.
Between 9 and 12 April 1984 a number of persons were killed by the
security forces in and around Jaffna in connection with incidents which
started after a bomb attack on an army truck on 9 April 1984. In 30
reported cases, it was said that no inquests were held.
92. OEe following aide m6moire was received by the Special Rapporteur from
the Representative of IIe Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka to the United Nations
Of f ice at Geneva on the occasion of IIe Representative's visit to the
pecial Rapporteur on 11 December 1984:
. [ Original: English]
“1. Separatist—terrorists have launched a series of attacks against
civilian and military targets in northern and eastern Sri Lanka.
2. OEey have also issued statements from their headquarters in Madras,
India, that this stepped—up terrorist activity is aimed at securing
a separate State by force, no later than 24 December.
Mr. Uma Maheswaram, a well—known and self—acknowledged terrorist
leader, has said: ‘Only one more major battle stands between us and
the establishment of Eelam.' (Note: ‘Eelam' is the name that
separatist—terrorists give to the State they wish to carve out of a
. dismembered Sri Lanka.)
3. According to press reports, this strategy was agreed upon at a
meeting in Madras on 10 November 1984. Leaders of almost all known
terrorist groups attended. A ‘minimum programme' to ‘liberate Eelam
, . . . immediately' was proposed, and the proposal adopted, according to
) . press reports.
4. Ten days later (on 20 November), the British news agency Reuter
, , reported from Madras that it had received a satement in Madras from
, . - . . . representatives of the terrorist Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization
‘ , . , (TaO) claiming credit for IIe murder of 29 police officers in an
attack on a police station at Chavakachchen in northern Sri Lanka.
T O leaders were present at the 10 November meeting.
OEe Chavakachcheri attack was a major event in the campaign of
‘ . “ stepped—up violence intended to ‘liberate' selected parts of
Sri Lanka. OEe ‘State of Eelam' would be declared in such
j ‘liberated' areas, and recognition sought from various countries.
, ‘
6 A partial chronology of incidents in this campaign is as follows:
. .
r 19 November OEe terrorists set off a land—mine explosion that
2 killed the Commanding Officer of the army
detachment in Jaffna and two other soldiers OEe
same day they also opened fire on a police
L contingent that provides escort to the
Jaffna—Colombo express train.
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 34
20 November
21 November to
29 November
30 November
Two hundred and fifty Tamil terrorists attacked
the police station in the northern city of
Chavakachcheri. Twenty—nine police officers were
killed when terrorists set explosives to the
police station and demolished it, while police
officers were inside.
OEe branches of several banks, and the entire
payroll of a hospital in northern Sri Lanka were
robbedp roads were mined and the homes of
civil servants were attacked across a swathe of
territory in the north and east of Sri Lanka.
A large Tamil terrorist group attacked settlers
in Kent Farm and Dollar Farm near the north
central town of Padaviya, killing some 100
Sinhalese settlers — men, women, and children.
Eighteen boats were sighted off the coast of
Mannar attempting to land terrorists. When fired
upon by a Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAP) aircraft,
the boats turned round and sped in the direction
of Tamil Nadu. In another incident off Delft,
the Navy opened fire on a terrorist boat killing
nine and injuring one. Before succumbing to
injuries, the survivor said that he was part of
an invasion task force.
2—3 December In the pre—dawn hours on 2 December, sea—borne
Having frightened away IIe fishermen in IIe area,
about 25 terrorists in two boats landed near
Talaimannar in north—western Sri Lanka.
On 3 December, terrorists attacked a goods train
at Chunnakain in Jaffna and took hostage nine
passengers from the majority Sinhalese ethnic
terrorists attacked two fishing villages in the
north—eastern district of Mullaitivu, killing 11
and injuring over 20 — men, women, and children.
Some 3,000 to 4,000 displaced persons (Sinhala, Malay and Moor) from
these villages and their environs have fled their hones and are in
makeshift centres for emergency relief in Anuradhapura. Civilians
from the majority ethnic group in other areas where the terrorists
have struck have also fled to these centres for displaced persons
and the Government of Sri Lanka is being assisted by
non—governmental organizations and voluntary organizations to care
for them.
Terrorists carried out a night attack on Joint
Security Services Operation Headquarters at
Vavuniya deep inside north Sri Lanka killing one
sentry and injuring another
. .
I
:2 ‘ E/CN.4/1986/2 1
page 35
group, including one abducted from Tellipalai
hospital. Terrorists demanded a ransom of
Sri Lanka rupees 10 million (SwF 1 million
approximately), release of a key terrorist leader
in custody, and withdrawal of all Sinhalese from
the cement factory at Kankasanthurai, Jaffna
4—7 December Terrorists blew up an army jeep in a mine
explosion in Mannar killing one and a.njunng
seven.
The Minister of National Security of Sri Lanka
announced at a press conference that he is
inclined to believe that the nine Sinhalese
hostages taken into terrorist custody in
-/ chunnakam have been killed. With no further
information from the kidnappers about the
hostages the authorities believe that IIey may
have already been murdered even before the ransom
was asked for and that the ransom demand was a
publicity stunt. Significantly the kidnappers
did not name the terrorist leader whom they
wanted released by the Government.
Consequent to the hostage taking by Tamil
terrorists, on 4 December some Sinhalese people
took 11 Tamils as hostages at the Cement Factory
in Puttalam in the north-western part of
Sri Lanka. OEe police were able to prevail on
the captors and obtain the release of those
hostages on 5 December.
The terrorists disrupted the holding of the
General Certificate of Education (Ordinary Level)
Examination (at Grade 10 level) in the north of
Sri Lanka by robbing some question papers and
threatening students to keep away from the
: examination. OEey stormed Vasivalan examination
centre near Jaffna and' removed question papers.
OEis act will no doubt disrupt the education of
: students in the northern part of Sri Lanka as it
will take some time for the examination
authorities to hold another examination.
No incident which could be identified as a
backlash for atrocities committed by separatist
Tamils on the Sinhala civilians in the northern
part of Sri Lanka was reported in the southern
: and central parts of Sri Lanka where the majority
Sinhala community live along with nearly 600,000
: : : Tamils. Indian Tamils who constitute
5.6 per cent of the total population in the
island and who are distinct from the Sri Lanka
Tamils who are 12.6 per cent, also live in these
I t
E/CN.4/ 1986/21
page 36
. . . . .
areas and their leader, Mx. S. Thondaman, is One
of the three Tamil Cabinet Ministers of the
Government.
About 1,000 youths have been taken in for
questioning by the Colombo police during the last
several days. Most of IIem have come from the
north to escape working for the terrorists and
the majority of IIose questioned have been
released. However, about 160 are still in
custody until their credentials are proved.
7. The attacks at Xent and Dollar farms were particularly brutal. Farm
houses were burnt down or blown up with the occupants inside. Men
were rounded up, their hands and legs tied, and they were shot
through the head. Children (ranging in age from one to five) were
shot through their bellies. All women were shot through the head at
close range.
8. Sri Laificans of all communities live at iCent and Dollar farms, as
well as in the fishing villages in Mullaitivu. Survivors have
described how Sinhala settlers were deliberately and carefully
selected for murder by the terrorist attackers.
9. Terrorists captured in engagements have admitted to receiving
military training abroad. OEe evidence of such training is
overwhelming. The explosives and military equipment captured carry
distinct markings of a foreign country. The arms seized include
rocket propelled grenades and self—loading rifles not available in
Sri Lanka.
.
10. OEe Government of Sri Lanka has been taking prompt and strenuous
measures to ensure that terrorist atrocities do not provoke any
reprisals in oIIer parts of the country against the Tamil population
living there. These measures have included imposing curfew hours, 4
and the police and army being kept on high alert in sensitive areas.
11 In response to the threats against Sri Lanka's sovereignty and
territorial integrity, the Government of Sri Lanka has taken
pre—emptive security measures in the threatened areas. These
measures ensure that the normal amenities available to the citizens
of all areas continue unabated Food supplies to Jaffna for example
continue uninterrupted and fishermen are being duly compensated for
loss of income.”
93. The following letter, dated 8 January 1984, was received from the
Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
[ Original: ngli5 !
“I have IIe honour to refer to your letter of 31 october 1984, and
to convey to you the following information from the Government of
Sri Lanka concerning the matters referred to in your letters
(I) Sri Lanka government agencies have not effected any executions 0 f a
summary or arbitrary nature.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 37
(2) Article 13 (4) of the Constitution of Sri Lanka provides that ‘No
person shall be punished with death or imprisonment except by order
of competent court, made in accordance with procedure established by
law'. However, even capital punishment in consequence of legal
procedures through competent courts has not been enforced since 1976.
(3) As regards the regulations and practice regarding IIe conduct of
armed services and other law enforcement agencies to ensure adequate
protection of the right to life, under the Penal Code of Sri Lanka
the armed services or law enforcement agencies do not have any
greater rights to self—defence than the civilians.
They would be entitled to cause death only to prevent death or
grievous injury being caused either to them or any other person.
However, in assessing whether the action which resulted in causing
of death was done bone fide in the exercise of the right to private
defence, greater weight is likely to be given to the assertion when
it is made by a member of the armed services or of the law
enforcement agencies. Even under the emergency regulations a member
of IIe armed services or law enforcement agencies who causes the
death of any person oIIerwise than in the exercise of the right of
private defence or defence of others could be charged in courts with
the sanction of the Attorney—General.
A course of lectures has been conducted by a senior officer of the
Attorney—General's Department where the members of the armed forces
and other law enforcement agencies have been addressed on their role
in the protection of society. It has been made clear to them that
they must act with discipline and restraint even in the face of the
greatest provocation. These lectures have been structured on the
guidelines contained in the United Nations Code Of Conduct for Law
Enforcement Officials.
As regards the specific incidents referred to in the annex to your
letter, the Government of Sri Lanka wishes to state the following:
Ci) In regard to the incident at Chunnakam on 28 March 1984,
investigations conducted by the Government have revealed that
on this date some air force personnel were returning from
Chunnakam after transacting business at the bank and purchasing
supplies of food. On their return journey to camp they had
been ambushed at two points by groups of terrorists agitating
for the establishment of a separate State i.e. ‘Eelam' in
Sri Lanka through violence. OEe first ambush was at Chunnakam
market and the second was on the road between chunnakam and
Tel lipalai. On both occasions when air force personnel were
forced to fire in self—defence — not at random as has been
asserted — some bystanders who were tragically caught in the
cross—fire succumbed to their injuries. The Government greatly
regrets this needless loss of life but is compelled to point
out that by purposely selecting crowded areas for their violent
activities, the terrorists deliberately heightened the risk of
injury to innocent members of the public. The report of the
official delegation of the Government of Switzerland, which
visited Sri Lanka in August 1984 to see for themselves the
, situation in the country, acknowledged that the terrorists
. . operating in the north of Sri Lanka use ‘urban guerrilla
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 38
tactics' and conduct their operations in public places in order
to disappear among the people and conceal themselves.
(ii) As regards the incidents that took place in the Jaffna
peninsula between 9 and 12 April 1984, the following is a
narration of the sequence of events as they transpired:
On 9 April 1984 when the army detachment which was assigned to
ensure the security of passengers — most of whom are Tamils —
against terorist attack on the daily Colombo—Jaffna railway
express train, was being transported back to its camp in
Jaffna, it was subjected to a bomb attack which seriously
injured 14 soldiers and totally destroyed IIe vehicle in which
they were travelling. OEe blast had resulted not from a bomb
that was thrown at the army truck, as has been widely reported,
but by a bomb that had been planted in a derelict car parked by
the roadside. Since the evidence was that the bomb in the
booby—trapped car could only have been activated by persons who
were taking cover in the adjoining premises, which was the
‘: Church of Our Lady of Refuge, the accompanying army escort,
which included an annoured car, took instantaneous' defensive
action, which included the return of small arms fire and the
firing of a single shell, from the armoured car. It was
unfortunate that as a consequence the Church itself was hit,
. ‘ ;. but it must be clearly stressed that the damage — which at most
involved some of the windows and the roof of the Church and,
, H contrary to reports that were widely circulated abroad, did not
. : , result in the total destruction of the church — was the result
of defensive action taken by armed personnel immediately after ‘ :
the bomb attack referred to above.
On the contrary, wanton acts against religious institutions can
be clearly established in the attacks by terrorists on 10 April
on the Si u bala Maha Vidyalaya (a school) and the Buddhist Naga
Vihara (temple) and on 11 April on the Sacred Bo—Tree in the
vihara (temple) premises, which were in no way connected with
any military operation.
As a consequence of these wanton acts of terrorism, the
Government was compelled to increase supervisory military
patrolling of the areas where terrorists had been known to
operate. These increases of military activity resulted in
skirmishes with terrorist groups in various parts of the Jaffna
peninsula. While it is correct that some innocent bystanders ‘T;.H
lost their lives in the course of this exchange of small ariAs .‘
fire, the Government of Sri Lanka must repeat the observations •
it has already made in regard to the incident at Chunnakatti,
that the terrorists themselves deliberately put members of the
public at risk by selecting crowded areas for their
activities. While the Government again reiterates its regret ;
at this needless loss of life, it should also be said that a ‘1
number of notorious terrorists, such as Kethiswaran and
Kiriupanandan, both leading members of the terrorist group
PLOTE which is among the terrorist groups whose declared ‘ I
objective is to establish through violence a separate State in
Sri Lanka on racial lines, had also succumbed to injuries
received during these incidents.
- - - . . . . . . . . . - . -.-...-.......-. .-. .— .
E/CN.4/1986/2 1
page 39
94. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
jn regard to Uganda, which reads as follows,
“Large numbers of persons were said to have been killed by the
Ugandan army in the Luwero triangle area in Buganda over a five—year
period beginning in 1979. Several persons were reported to have died of
starvation as a result of the deviation by the Ugandan army of
humanitarian relief from its destination.
Other deaths allegedly committed by members of the army are the
killing of some 300 personsi including women and children, in the town of
Nantugongo at the end of May 1984, 18 persons in the village of i cigoiwbe
reported in mid—August, and 20 clergymen at an Anglican Theological
College and Seminary at Namugongo.”
5. No reply has been received from the Government of Uganda.
96. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of IIe allegations received
in regard to Zaire, which reads as follows ,
“More than 100 prisoners were reported to have been summarily executed at
t/ o detention centres in Kinshasa during the past two years. It is alleged
that IIe executions occurred at the Deuxi me Cit& de 1'OUA and the detention
centre at the headquarters of the National Gendarmerie, supervised by the
Brigade sp ciale de recherches at de surveillance. During January 1984 some
eight prisoners were reported to have been killed at this centre.”
97 No reply has been received from IIe Government of Zaire.resulting in loss
of life or property has been reported. ‘“
...
.. .: : . ; • •:i .j
E laN .4/1986/21
page 40
B. Allegations communicated in 1985
98. In 1985, IIe Special Rapporteur communicated allegations of summary or
arbitrary executions to Governments concerned wiII a request for furIIer
information thereon. OEe majority of the Governments responded positively to
IIe Special Rapporteur' s request and furnished comments and/or information in
regard to the allegations.
99. OEe Special flapporteur was also visited by representatives of a number of
Governments in connection wiII the allegations communicated to their
Governments. He has found such visits extremely useful for obtaining a
better understanding of specific situations with specific backgrounds. Also
he considers it important to establish a channel of contact wiII Governments
for the purpose of his mandate.
100. OEe following paragraphs reflect IIe allegflions communicated to the
Governments concerned and IIeir replies thereto. They are organized in
alphabetical order by country 3 they concern IIe provisions of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights designed to safeguard the
right to life, namely, articles 4, 6, 7, 9, 14 and 15.
101. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Afghanistan, which reads as follows: .:
“Further to the allegations communicated to the Government by letter
of 31 October 1984, a number of persons were reported to have been
sentenced to death by a Special Revolutionary Court. OEose sentenced to
death were convicted of committing of fences against IIe security of the
State, such as antiState, counter—revolutionary activities, armed
resistance against IIe security forces, terrorism and escape from
military service (see list below).
“It was alleged that the defendants were not given the right to
) appeal to a higher tribunal.
Death sentences by the Special Revolutionary Court
1. OEree unnamed men Sentence passed in November 1984 in GhaZnl
Province for charges described as ‘evading
military service and participating in 4
attacks on government security forces'
2. Mohammad Jan Sentence passed in January 1985 for charges
described as ‘multiple murder'
3. Two unnamed men Sentence passed on 12 January 1985 in
Jozjan Province, for ‘smuggling arms and 7
fighting against the Government'
4. W i - ian Gui Sentence passed in January 1985 in Ichost,
Paktia Province, for charges described as
‘fighting against IIe State, killing and
looting' 1:
5. Mdul Khaliq Sentence passed on 12 February 1985 in
Suleiman OEan Mazar—i—Sharif, Balkh Province, for a
Abdul Hakim charge described as ‘opposing the
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 41
6. Mohammad Sharif
Mohammad A u
Mohaimnad Nashem
Baz Mohamtuad (Bazo)
Mohammad Nasim
7. Three unnamed men
8. Emaritoddin (Mawlawj
Ahmed)
Mohammad Taier
Said Aref
Ramazan
10. AEdul Razzag
Fida Mohammad
Sentence passed on 10 and 12 February 1985
Mazar—i—Sharif, Balkh Province, for charges
described as ‘anti—State,
counter—revolutionary , armed
resistance against the security forces and
escape from military service'
Sentence passed in April 1985, Kabul , for
charges described as ‘killing eight people
and setting of f bouts in various parts of
Kabul'
Sentence passed in April 1985, for charges
described as ‘terrorism, murder and
resisting IIe security forces'
Sentenced on 4 June 1985 in Kabul for
charges described as ‘major terrorist
acts'
Sentenced in June 1985 for charges described
as ‘killing innocent people and looting on
highways'
102. No written reply has been received from the Government of Afghanistan.
However, the Special Rapporteur received a telephone communication from the
Permanent Mission of Afghanistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva on
14 January 1986 to the effect IIat in Afghanistan there were no summary or
arbitrary executions.
.103. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Angola, which reads as followsi
: “Between February 1984 and January 1985, 36 civilians were reported
to have been sentenced to deaII by military courts. OEose sentenced to
) death were convicted of committing offences against IIe security of the
State, such as treason, espionage and armed rebellion (see list below).
It was alleged IIat trials by the military courts in which those
persons were sentenced to. death were not conducted by an independent and
impartial tribunal, that IIe defendants and IIeir counsel were not given
. adeg t time and facilities for the preparation of IIeir defence, that
their conviction was based on evidence or statements which they made
‘. duress while in pre—trial custody, and IIat appeal to a higher
ttOE%jnal was not guaranteed.
Regional
, Name Date Military Charge
,. Tr i bunal
Isaias Jeremias 20 Feb. 1984 4th Region, treason and
Huambo espionage
t IMTAs, Simao 25 April 1984 4th Region, treason,
Cinto espionage and
sabotage
9.
:. :
: :
, , ‘
. :: . :
. : • : ,
, . :
I
r
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 42
Name
SINDACO, Abilio
SEGUNDA, Paulo
Date
1 May 1984
Regional
Military
TrIIuna] .
3rd Region,
Moxico
charge
armed rebellion
CHIMBAZA, Albino
CHflUNSA, Felisberto Mateus
PANDERA, Mango Tchiamba
6 May 1984
6th Region,
Menongue
armed rebellion
GMIDO, Justo
MANUEL, Joaquim
CHIMUCO, Miguel
MULAI4GUE, C ndido
CANBINDA, Daniel
CATUCUTTJCO, Paulino
ICESSONGA, Eduardo
BANGO, Fernando
ISPILA, Antonio
LINGUNBA, Manuel
MANUEL, Floriano
EPALANGA, Frederico
MANUEL, Jos&
IJMBA, Domingos Alberto
FELISBERTO, Filipe
SOMRI, Gaspar
—
CANEQUE, Joao Domingos
BARROS, Antonio Quarta
NUNDA, Antonio Calufele
KATACU, Afonso
KIAMBAS$tJCA, Alberto
KIMBOTO, Adriano
(tried and convicted
in absentia )
SECAtWO, Eurico
29 Aug. 1984
7 Sept. 1984
13 Oct. 1984
24 Oct. 1984
3 Nov. 1984
9 Nov. 1984
29 Nov. 1984
5 Dec. 1984
28 Dec. 1984
29 Dec. 1984
5II Region,
Lubango
5th Region,
tub an go
SII Region,
Lubango
6th Region,
Men on gue
9II Region,
Malanje
4II Region,
Ruambo
5th Region,
Huila
9II Region,
Malanj e
7II Region,
Benguela
9II Region,
Nda latanda
offences against
the security of
IIe State and
crimes against
the people
armed rebellion
armed rebellion
and of fences : : :
against the
secruity of IIe
State Hi
armed rebellion
espionage and
treason
treason and
armed rebelli0
j1ita r y
rebelliOfl id
sabotage
treason,
rebelli0 and
economic
g otage H
)
espionage and
sabotage
treason and
armed rebei.1J.dlt
E/CN. 4/1986/21
1 ame
LtJQUEMBE, Fuastino
TCHOQUILfl'lHA, Xavier F&lix
UAIICA, Tiago
DUMBA, Francisco
Augosto
SEGUNDA, Geraldo
Date
10 Jan. 1985
12 Jan. 1985
page 43
Regional
Miii tary
Tr i bunal
9II Region,
Dondo
6th Region 1
Menongue
I
Charge
conspiracy to
cause explosions
in the town of
Dondo
counter-
revolutionary
activities and
membership of
UNITA”
104. No reply has been received from IIe Government of Angola.
105. The Special Bapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Chile, which reads as follows:
“A number of persons were alleged to have died in detention as a
result of ill—treatment while in the custody of the police of the
National tnforrnation Agency (Central Nacional de Informaciones (CMI)).
The names of those who died in detention were given as followsz
Juan Antonio Aguirre Ballesteros (23)
arrested on 4 September 1984 and taken to the 26th Comisarfa in
Pudahuel;
found dead on 24 October 1984, headless and mutilated
Mario FerMndez L6pez (about 50)
arrested on 17 October 1984
died on 18 October 1984 in hospital after having been taken there
from a CNI detention centre in Cola Cob, La Serena, with serious
internal injuries
Patricia Manzano (21
arrested on 8 February 1985 in San Felipe
died on 9 February 1985 in an ambulance on the way to hospital
from the 1st Comisarfa in Santiago
Carlos Godoy (23
arrested on 21 February 1985 in Quintero
died on 22 February 1985 in an ambulance on the way to hospital
from the police station”
The following letter, dated 29 October 1995, was received from IIe
ermanent Mission of Chile to the United Nations Of f ice at Geneva ;
“I have IIe honour to refer to your communication of 15 October 1985
in Which reference is made to the communication of 12 July 1985 from
• Autos Wako, Special Rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions.
: Spanish)
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 44
In IIis connection, I have the honour to inform you that, according
to information received today from my Government, the four cases referred
to by IIe Special Rapporteur are currently the subject of separate
proceedings taking place before the courts with a view to determining the
precise circumstances of the deaths and those responsible for IIem.
The various proceedings in question are at the pre—trial stage and a
number of preliminary inquiries have been ordered as a result of which,
in some cases, persons have been committed for trial. It can thus be
seen that the courts are following up the cases with a view to
investigating them thoroughly.
In any event, these regrettable incidents are ordinary of fences of
homicide and are being dealt with as such by the courts. They could
hardly, therefore, be included among the cases described as ‘summary or
arbitrary executions'.”
107. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Colombia, which reads as follows:
“A number of persons were reportedly found dead after having been
detained by IIe police, security agents and IIe military, sometimes with
signs of torture or gunshot wounds on their corpses.
The names of those found dead were given as follows:
Luis Cardona
arrested on 27 January 1985, found dead one week later in J!ntioquia
Alcides Santo
arrested on 3 February 1985, found dead on 5 February 1985 in
Antioquia
Augusto Su5rez
arrested on 3 February 1985, found dead on 15 February 1985 in
Caquet&
Guillermo Quaroz
arrested on 12 April 1985, found dead on 14 April 1985 on IIe road
from Cartagena to Barranqinlla”
108. The following replies, dated 28 November 1985 and 3 December 1985, were
received from the Permanent Mission of Colombia to the United Nations office
at Geneva:
(a) 28 November 1985
[ Original: Spanish]
. , , ,
“On the day that a group of terrorists attacked the Palace of A 1
Justice of my country and proceeded to carry out ‘arbitrary, ‘ 5 mmary
and ‘extra legal' executions of IIe President of the Supreme Court of
Justice of Colombia and 10 other judges, I had IIe opportunity to ViSt
you, as previously arranged, and to provide you wiII IIe informatiofl
which you requested on 12 July of this year, in accordance with the
mandate conferred on you by the Economic and Social Council
(resolution 1985/40, 30 May 1985).
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 45
i now have IIe honour to transmit an additional written reply to
your note of 22 July 1985, on behalf of the Government of Colombia.
H i In the first place, may I say how much we admire and respect your
work and reiterate our readiness to co—operate in it. Nevertheless, for
that work to be more useful to our shared goal of preserving human
rights, we venture to point out that it cannot be generally stated — nor
is there any proof whatsoever — that summary or arbitrary executions have
been carried out by IIe Colombian authorities. It has not been
established that IIe informants have had first—hand and reliable
knowledge of such executions, and domestic remedies for investigating the
charges made have not been exhausted.
We should like to have more detailed information on the sources and
t ) evidence on which the annexes to your notes of 22 July 1985 and
31 October 1984 are based, i i i order to give a more specific reply.
We cannot apply to Colombia a kind of ‘ devil's advocate' approach by
assuming IIe truII of certain allegations of violations by IIe
authorities, simply because those authorities are not, for the moment, in
a position to prove the contrary. OEe burden of proof, according to
tradition and prevailing norms of international law, and in the
Commission of Human Rights itself, is on the accuser, especially when
there is an additional circumstance such as the existence of an interest
on the part of violent elements connected with drug traffic and terrorism
in using IIe Commission on Human Rights to discredit a democratic r&gime,
a state under the rule of law, and a republic where all modern public
freedoms prevail.
An attempt is made to confuse and deceive the organizations and
persons responsible for seeing that human rights are respected by
distorting the facts and covering up violence against innocent persons,
the legitimate democratic authorities and judges themselves, with
exaggerated and distorted allegations of various acts. Moreover, the
outrage perpetrated against Colombian justice by an unspeakable and
monstrous alliance between drug—trafficking terrorists and common
criminals who are trying to pass IIemselves off as political offenders,
is the tragic culmination of threats and previous attacks against judges
in Colombia, which an objective, calm and impartial rapporteur such as
yourself cannot fail to take into account when he analyses our situation,
and which partially explains the difficulty in carrying out
investigations.
You will doubtless agree that a firmly—rooted democracy such as .
Colombia, with separation of powers and an independent judiciary
(co—opted with no participation by the Executive), a free press and free
trade unions, an opposition wiII guaranteed rights, regular elections,
all, the freedoms of a modern constitutional State (despite the enormous
difficulties and problems of underdevelopment), cannot be judged
according to the same criterion as a dictatorship in which the only
recourse left to the opposition is to overthrow it through some form of
force or unconventional armed uprising. In Colombia, the normal
procedures are available to IIe opposition, something which should not be
&
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 46
Regarding the state of siege, Strachey gave it the perfect
definition when he stated that a totalitarian State did not need to
decree a state of siege because totalitarianism was tantamount to living
in a permanent (and, I would add, highly developed) state of siege.
What is revealed by the imposition of a state of siege in Colombia is
: precisely the State's weakness when faced with the terrible and
implacable phenomena of pseudo—political criminality, common criminality
and drug trafficking, with their blurred dividing lines, shameful
H. alliances and common aims of destabilizing one of the few nations which
has managed — in the midst of difficulties which we do not deny — to
. i .. . preserve the essence of law, liberty and democracy, despite the Latin
American conflagration.
, “ ‘n Your note of 12 July (page 2) stated ‘in some cases IIe safeguards
usually envisaged to protect the right to life did not seem to function
adequately' (the underlining is mine) an assertion which implies that
these cases are isolated and cannot be qualified as systematic or gross
violations of our obligations under the international covenants which we
have signed and which we observe. We admit that there are situations of
violence in Colombia. It distresses and concerns us that, in some
cases, subordinate authorities have become involved in this spiral of
: violence. However, this action has been in spite of Government efforts
: : and indeed contrary to the express wishes of IIe Government. We also
‘H [ F have an Office of the Government Attorney, which is independent of the
Executive, and which is unwavering in conducting investigations, bringing
, : , charges, and monitoring the situation. The judiciary is also
independent of the Executive, and fulfils its mission amidst enormous
difficulties, some of which are inherent in underdevelopment itself.
: :‘: :ll Others are due to the fact that we have failed to keep up with the
three—fold cramnality mentioned above, which has clandestine external
financing and support, and even goes so far as to attack judges and
magistrates directly, as we have seen, in an inhuman way which
demonstrates what their goals are.
Regarding the cases you mention in your annex (‘A number of persons
3 were reportedly found dead after having been detained by the police,
security agents and the military, sometimes with signs of torture or
gunshot wounds on their corpses'), namely Luis Cardona, Alcides Santo,
Augusto Sufflez and Guillermo Quiroz, the judiciary and Of fice of the
Government Attorney are conducting investigations and their findings will
be transmitted to you We may observe at the outset that these alleged
cases all occurred this year, and I would ask you to send us proof that
these men were detained by IIe auIIorities, as well as the alleged proof
of torture, to allow more time for the investigations, which are not 4
easy, for the reasons mentioned above.
Another annex states, ‘a number of persons were allegedly killed by , .
the army, police or paramilitary forces in'particulai in the areas
guerrilla groups were reported to be active' (the underlining is mine)
It is obvious that those people were killed in armed uprisings when
attacking barracks, taking villages, murdering innocent people, and
kidnapping women, old people and children for ransom.
No constituional State can be asked not to defend itself against 4
armed attacks by gangs of criminals. The annex also states, that ‘the
number of persons killed between August 1982 and May 1984 was said to
in the region of 900' which specific region is being referred to?
go on to say: ‘the victims reportedly included peasants, human rights
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 47
activitists, union leaders and a number of those who had been released as
a result of an amnesty law in November 1982, and, in all
reportedly unarmed civilians' . We categorically reject this statement,
since it cannot be proven IIat, in all cases, ‘unarmed civilians' were
involved. The ‘unarmed civilians' who unfortunately died in Colombia
during IIat period, were generally killed by guerrilla forces or
subversives, and not by Government agents. We should like to know which
cases involved victims that were ‘human rights activists'. Who are
these unarmed activists? We are not familiar wiII these cases.
Peasants have been killed and intimitated by guerrillas. Neither
do we know of any trade—union leaders who have died, apart from those who
have been murdered by the guerrillas themselves. It is true that some
of those granted amnesty by the law have been killed, and these cases are
; being investigated. But in some cases this appears to be the work of
IIeir former comrades—in—arms, who sentenced them to deaII for not having
continued the struggle.
With regard to the fact IIat ‘IIe Attorney General had made a report
on the participation and responsibility of security forces in extra—legal
killings wiII recommendation for appropriate legal action in regard to a
number of members of IIe forces concerned', IIis shows precisely that the
Government Attorney is an independent official who has not hesitated to
bring charges — and is currently bringing charges — in a few isolated
cases of abuse which are being investigated by the justice authorities in
the face of great difficulties in finding evidence.
S
As you mentioned, in Colombia an amnesty act (and another act of
pardon) was passed during the period 1982—1985 which were so generous in
scope that the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and
Protection of Minorities approved by consensus resolution 1984/16, which
pointed out the positive nature of the peace process in Colombia and even
stated: ‘Considering that this valuable precedent should be encouraged,
since it progressively transforms a process of conflict into a momentum
for peace, creating conditions for national reconciliation, inasmuch as
it takes into account not only the effects but also the economic and
social causes of the situation'.
Precisely because this is a process in which the good faith of the
Colombian Government is obvious, the Sub—Commission refrained from
dealing with allegations similar to those previously mentioned in your
etter of July 1885. Despite incidents such as those which occurred at
:.aw courts, with the participation of criminals who had been recently
from prison under the amnesty act, the Government is continuing
Y ace and reconciliation efforts. I would ask you to see that this
cta.s taken into account and duly acknowledged when your report is
1985
(Originals Spanish]
instructions from my Government, I should like to supplement my
721 with the following specific information on cases of alleged
or summary executions:
tf
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 48
(a) C sar A usto Su r z Victoria
Attached is a photocopy of the special search warrant issued by
Military Court of Criminal Investigation No. 129, based at Larandia,
Caquet , in case No. 040 concerning the offence of homicide committed on
8 February 1985 against the person of C sar Augusto SuArez, in which the
soldier Jos Antonio Perdomo. Justinico is accused and indicted. The
warrant is a document of three pages, the last of which contains seals
and signatures of the head of the local branch of the -Attorney—General's
Of fice, the holder and the Clerk of the Court (annex 1).
Preliminary proceedings have been instituted against a soldier with
a view to investigating and punishing the offence.
II) Guillermo Enrique Quiroz Tietjen (annex 2, pp. 2 and 3)
Here too, pre—trial proceedings are being conducted against an
official of the Administrative Security Department; the situation
: I.tJ , regarding the case is similar to (a).
(c) Luis Cardona and Alcides Santos (annex 2, pp. 3—6)
. : A case continues to be prepared against unknown persons in other
: :‘!J. words, there is no evidence of culpability by a meeter of the armed
forces, IIe police or the security forces.
:: : ! As ‘ou will realize, very considerable efforts are. being made to
elucidate the facts and punish the culprits, in accordance with the
Government' s express will to uphold IIe rule of law and prevent any abuse
of authority. I trust that you will duly appreciate this fact.”
Attachment to letter of 3'December 1985
, : : “To: Dr. Jaime HerMndez Salazar
Deputy Attorney—General of the Nation
: .Li't We hereby submit the report of the Committee set up by IIe
;‘ Attorney—General's Office on 13 August, which supplements IIe report of
16 August on the same subject.
COMPLAINT
This investigation is based on the document signed by IIe Secretary
for International Organizations and Conferences of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Colombia, stating the following: ‘... Nr. Wako also
requests that, for the purpose of preparing his report to the Commission ,
on Human Rights, the Government of Colombia should urgently supply
information on four especially sensitive cases of citizens who were fQU1 :‘ ,
dead after being arrested by the police, security officers or members of
the armed forces, sometimes with signs of torture or bullet wounds on tb .
bodies. OEe cases are the following: (a) Luis Cardona, arrested on ‘ :
27 January 1985 and found dead in Antioqu a one week later; (b) “ [
Alcides Santos, arrested on 3 February 1985 and found dead in Afltioquza. .
on 5 February; (c) Augusto Su rez, arrested on 3 February 1985 and foul'
dead on 15 February 1985 in Caquet ; Cd ) Guillermo Quiroz, arrested :: ‘
12 April 1985 and found dead on 14 April 1985 on IIe
Barranquilla—Cartagena road .‘ • r ,
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 49
INQUIflIES CONDUCTED
A. Investigation into th deII haj idabdtiction bf
Guillermo Enrique Quiroz Tietjen
OEe Second High Court of Cartagena had the case referred to it by
the Sixth Court of Criminal Investigation. A written application was
made on 21 August for collection of the evidence requested by IIe special
representative of the Attorney—General's Of fice and the inquiries ordered
by IIe court trying the case, including the questioning of police officer
Alberto Grisales Henao.
OEe request was granted by IIe competent court and the investigation
remitted to the Sixth Court of Criminal Investigation of Cartagena which,
with the co—operation of the aforementioned Of fice, carried out IIe
following inquiries:
On 23 August the body of Guillermo Enrique Quiroz Tietjen was
exhumed in order to establish whether the wounds received bore a direct,
predominant or merely circumstantial relation to death, whether there had
been torture (an arm had been severed according to the statement by
Adolf o Quiroz) and whether death had occurred slowly through .
subjection. Dr. Luis pilonieta Rueda was commissioned to prepare a
forensic medical report, and his findings will be submitted to the Office
in due course.
Police officer Alberto Grisales Henao was questioned at
San ArzdIIs (Islas) in the presence of a representative of the
Attorney—General. It should be noted IIat IIe investigating magistrate
had ordered this action to be taken as long ago as 29 April, but it had
not been possible to conduct IIe interrogation because the police officer
concerned was constantly being transferred. OEe deposition was finally
made on 24 August, at IIe request of the special agency.
A judicial inspection was carried out at the Cartagena office of
DAS, where a vehicle corresponding to the description of the one
reportedly used for the crime was found and it was established that IIe
DAS Official Edgar Trujillo Acosta had been in the San Jacinto region on
the ay preceding IIe crime. As a result, the investigating magistrate
Was asked to include the DAS official in IIe proceedings.
The following special requests of the Attorney—General's office
emerged from IIe Committee's sitting: provision of copies for IIe
purpose of the criminal investigation against Wilfrido Cervantes Beltran,
Agus j Pafael Ariza Gonz&lez and Genaro Viloria for violations of
artzc.le 176 of IIe Penal Codej copies to the regional branch of the
httotney_Generalls office at Cartagena for IIe purpose of investigating
of the police force of San Jacinto and Carmen de oeol.tvar, since
orse from IIese police forces were kept at the Eajo de Oso ranch and
Staft of these units were on guard there. • However, when the BogoM
snmtnal police, assisting the Attorney—General's office, conducted a
search in connection with the investigation, they found weapons for the
exclu 51 0 use of the armed forces and personnel lacking due legal
authorization, a situation which led the Commander of the Atlantic Naval
corce to hand down a decision to IIat effect; copies for an
‘ /vestt tion by the regional branch of the Attorney—General's office at
Ctag of DAS agent Edgar Trujillo Acosta for receiving 2,000 pesos
-- - - --
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 50
when he was at the Bajo de Oso ranch owned by P.odolfo Donado, according
to a receipt included in the evidence of the investigation, together with
the confiscation of the weapons concerned: an application dated
29 August also called for the detention of police officer
Alberto Grisales Henao on the grounds that the requirements of
article 439 of the Code of Penal Procedure were met. The applications
concerned are annexed to this report.
B. Investigation into the death of Luis Cardona and Alcides Santos
OEe present situation is as follows-:
Bearing in mind the written application by Alonso N6nez, and
subsequent recognition of the contents thereof, regarding the
circumstances of the death of the persons concerned, two criminal
investigations were found to be in progress against unknown persons in
the Twelfth High Court of Medellin and the Second High Court of Manizales.
The Twelfth High Court of Medellin is dealing wiII this matter as
case No. 5629, proceedings against unknown persons for the crime of
homicide. The facts are IIe following; at 5 p.m. on 4 February 1985,
IIe San Miguel—Sonson departmental police inspectorate lifted a corpse
out of the R io la Niel. Description of the location: ‘The body was
submerged about 30 metres from the shore of the San Miguel Viejo ranch on
IIe Rio la Miel, 100 metres from IIe San Miguel—Totumo road,
approximately 2.5 kilometres from the Corregimiento urban centre; there
is a two—metre gufley leading down to the shore'. Clothing: black,
striped trousers, red underpants, dark blue vest, dark brown patterned
socks, dark brown rubber footwear. Concerning the wounds, the record of
the operation refers to an ‘entry wound produced by a short—range firearm
in the left thorax, exiting through the left armpit with damage to the
rear side of the left arm and bruising to the hands, apparently caused by
bindings. Ears bitten by fish .... Hands tied behind the body.' The
autopsy — No. 3, carried out on 5 February 1985 by
Dr. Rodrigo Gaviria Obreg6n, Medical Director of San Miguel, reads as
follows: ‘... From an external exai tination of the body ... it is - - — ,
concluded IIat death occurred within 24 hours ... Conclusion: death
occurred as a direct result of anexia caused by submersion after the : -
subject was shot by a firearm arid sent flying into the water, still alive
. .‘. As regards age, IIe record gives it as 45.
1n investigation is being conducted in the Second High Court of
Manizales, as case No 12—732, into the crime of homicide committed by
unknown suspects. The inquiry was conducted by the Departmental 4
Inspector of La Atarraya (La Dorada—Caldas) at 8 p.m. on
4 February 1985. Location: ‘Los Achales ranch'. Clothing: ‘No
shirt, striped blue dacron trousers; white underpants red socks;
black belt 7 yellow leather boots'. Age: 42 years.
We followed this up by talking to Mr. Alonso Niiffiez, author of the
application which led to the request of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
for an investigation into the death of Alcides Santos and Luis Cardona.
The witness lives at Armero (Tolima), and provided the following
information;
Mr. Alcides Santos used to present himself as Ram6n in the mine andjL
an account is given of his conduct and other activities by
Mr Luis Charry, who resides in IIe jurisdiction of L6rida, near the
Los Laureles ranch. -
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 51
Alonso N6flez undertook that Mr. Luis Charry, who knew those who are
now deceased and even worked with them in the mine, would co-operate in
the investigation and participate in the inquiries to be conducted in the
district of San Miguel and La Atarraya in order to locate the persons who
were eyewitnesses of the events, as referred to in the written statement
by Alonso N6fez.
We also visited the Departmental Inspectorate of San Miguel and
talked wiII Juval Casteblanco, parish priest, who stated that he had seen
the bodies with the hands tied behind the back, that according to the
parishioners the persons concerned were not from the region and that they
had apparently been killed on the same day at IIe localities already
mentioned.
At the Departmental Inspectorate of La Atarraya, no further
information was obtained, this being a place with a small population; it
adjoins the Inspectorate of San Miguel, and IIe two are separated by the
Rio la Miel. In the village of Puerto Boyac , the members of this
Committee talked with Mrs. Eucaris Velisquez Y6pez, bearer of identity
card No. 24,893,840 from Puerto Boyac , and
Miss Aura Isabel Cardona Velasco, bearer of identity card No. 46,642,561
of the same municipality, residing at Carrera 2a, No. 5—15,
Barrio Pueblo Nuevo, daughter of Luis Cardona, who stated that her father
‘ had been travelling from La Atarraya to La Dorada in a vehicle driven by
a man known as ‘el Ganso', resident of La Dorada, that he had been
removed from the car by two occupants at a place called El Indio, and
that nothing certain had been leaned of his whereabouts up to the
present time. Describing her father, Miss Cardona Velasco said that
some of his teeth were missing and the remainder in bad condition, that
he had stiff joints on the fingers of the left hand and some white
patches on the skin. She also stated that more detailed information
could be obtatned from Mrs. Hohelia, his latest wife, who lived in
La Dorada.
OEe manager of the Agrarian Credit Bank in Puerto Boyac5 informed us
:that. Pedro Luis Cardona Trejos, bearer of identity card No. 1,295,959 of
La Dorada, ‘El Porvenir' ranch, San Fernando Camitarra, living with his
companion Luceli Velasquez, had a debt of 90,000 pesos plus interest
accumulated since March 1983 and that IIe ‘El Porvenir' ranch was
He further, stated that Aura Isabel Cardona, residing at
Fera 2a, No. 5—15, Puerto Boyac , was inquiring into the action to be
ento claim the ranch as the daughter of Cardona Trejos.
tENTS
!iZst, with due respect for your decision, we consider that it is
5Sary to pursue the inquiries into the deaths of Alcides Santos and
ona with the collaboration of Mr. Luis Charry. For this
operatives and a lawyer are needed, since these investigations
] .inaccuracies regarding the identification of the bodies found and
ibility for the events.
aSecona, we shall convey the results of the Committee's inquiries to
P ts named above. The relevant reports are attached
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 52
OEird, attached are photocopies of the three investigations
conducted in connection with the present report.
( Signed ) Jos& Oswaldo Carreto Hern ndez ( Signed ) Ricardo Ch vez Roa
H Legal Consultant Criminalist”
109. On 8 November 1985, the Permanent Representative of Colombia at the
United Nations Office at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur concerning the
H above—mentioned allegation.
110. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Ghana, which reads as follows:
uIn June 1983, immediately after a coup attempt, some 70 persons
were reportedly executed without a trial by the security forces for their
suspected connection with the coup attempt. In March 1984, 11 persons,
mostly soldiers, were reported to have been executed after having been
sentenced to death in absentia by the public tribunals for their part in
previous coup attempts in 1982 and 1983, or without any legal
proceedings. )mong those who were executed without any legal
proceedings, the following names were given:
Private Kwame Tekpor, Warrant Off icer Frimpong, Corporal Apatinga,
Corporal Gyekye, Lance—Corporal Saricadie, Lance—Corporal Sismarck
and John Ofori Wilson, a civilian. . .
It was alleged that until August 1984 the Public Tribunal did not
allow the right of appeal and also that procedural safeguards in order to
ensure a fair trial were not guaranteed, such as independence and
qualification of judges, standard of proof and evidence for adoption by
the tribunal and distribution of burden of proof.” .
ill. No reply has been received from IIe Government of Ghana.
112. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Guatemala, which reads as follows;
“A number of persons were found dead after having been abducted or
disappeared. The corpses often showed signs of torture. The names of
those persons were given as follows: , , , :
tlayra Janeth Meza Soberanis (27)
found dead on 28 January 1995 in Mazatenango
Neftajj Morales de la Cruz
his corpse thrown from a flying helicopter on 10 January 1985
in Mazatenango H
Aurela.o Cotto Melgar
found dead on 14 March 1985 in Guatemala City
Flavio Jos Qiaezada SaldaLa (29)
shot to death on 23 March 1985
Carlos Enrique Cabrera Garcia
shot dead on 27 March 1985 in Guatemala City
]
.4/1986/21
page 53
Manuel Sosa Avila
shot dead on 31 March 1985
H6ctor Orlando G6mez Calito (32)
fauna dead on 31 March 1985, mutilated
Mar!a del Rosaria Godoy Aldana de Cuevas (24)
Augusta Rafael Godoy, her son of 2 years old, and
Mynor Godoy Aldana, her brother
found dead an 4 April 1985 outside Guatemala City”.
113. The following replies, dated 15 July 1985, 28 November 1985 and
15 January 1986, were received from the Permanent Mission of Guatemala to the
United Nations Office at Geneva:
(a) 15 July 1985
(Original; Spanish]
,,
I wish in the most courteous manner to remind you that in my country
three military organizations of a subversive nature, identifying
: themselves by IIe abbreviations EGP, ORPA and FAR, are operating with
support originating from abroad, these organizations, wiII the aim of
terrorizing the population and IIus undermining its spirit of resistance,
are systematically committing acts of violence, which include attacks,
murders, abductions, thefts, etc.
OEe law enforcement authorities are endeavouring diligently to
prevent these acts but this task, as is fully demonstrated by the
chronicle of terrorism throughout the world, has proved impossible even
in developed countries.
The resources and methods used by terrorism, which has now attained
international dimensions and in many developing countries passes itself
off as ‘revolutionary struggle', present IIe authorities with
difficulties and complications which cannot easily be controlled and
overcome.
FurIIermore, it will not have escaped your enlightened attention
that it is very easy and convenient for these organizations to accuse the
Governments they are trying to destabilize of the crimes which they
themselves commit. Consequently, it is improper to accept them as
‘Sumnary or arbitrary executions'.
I shall in due course transmit to you the information I receive from
my Govenment concerning the persons referred to in the annex to your
note.
.— - - . . . , ,
I
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 54
I I) 28 November 1985
(Original: Spanish]
“... has the honour, with reference to notes c/SO 214 (33—2) and
(33—3), concerning Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40, to
transmit below the comments of the Government of Guatemala in respect of
note c/so 214 (33—3), dated 12 July 1985, which alleges that our
Government lacks safeguards protecting the right to life, and also
adequate means of ensuring observance of this universal right.
In this regard, the Government of Guatemala wishes to state that
both observations are erroneous, in that IIe laws of the State of
Guatemala are based on absolute respect for human rights, while
Guatemala's criminal law describes and classifies as offences all forms
: ) of behaviour which endanger the life and safety of individuals and their
rights. OEis is a legal right which is safeguarded, and these laws
concern both private persons and officials of all types.
The following of fences may be cited by way of example: homicide;
. • . aggravated homicide, assault and discharge of a firearm, bodily injury,
rape, abduction, kidnapping, illegal detention, illegal arrest, unlawful
4 search of residence, coercion and threats, extortion, fraud, usurpation
. :fl of office, usurpation of status, genocide, offences against basic human
duties, violation of the Constitution, terrorism, illegal assembly of
1 . armed persons, possessing and carrying firearms, abuse of authority,
refusal of assistance, illegal detention, abuses against individuals,
false accusation and denunciation, delays in and denial of justice, and :‘
so forII. Both the Constitution of Guatemala and its criminal and
criminal trial laws contain wide—ranging technical provisions concerning
criminal procedure, which devolves on one of the three organs of the
State, IIe Judiciary, while completely independent, it most certainly
observes the universal principles of this branch of the law
:
OEere are no cases in Guatemala of summary or arbitrary executions,
1 ' and habeas corpus and amparo exist under Guatemalan law.
On IIe administrative side, Guatemala has a National Police
Directorate—General and a Treasury Police Directorate—General They ate )
responsible for keeping public order, protecting the life and safety of
persons and their possessions, preventing crimes and other offences I
against the law, co—operating in the investigation of offences and
presenting offenders before the appropriate courts, in addition to
carrying out all the preventive, repressive or merely executive tasks
which devolve on the police service. BoII Directorates—General, as part
of their duties and in keeping with their technical, human and budgetarYJ
: resources, carry out their duties conscientiously and responsiblyi
legally they are answerable to IIe courts of justice of the Republic 911
However, it should be added that in Guatemala, as in other countri . ?41
some de facto situations may escape the immediate control of the
authorities, and that these comments are applicable boII to
notes G/sO 214 (33—2) and (33—3) and to any notes issued in IIe futuret [
containing sinu.lar allegations.
In transmitting the foregoing, the Permanent Mission of Guatetnala
would be grateful if its comments could be transmitted to
Special Rapporteur of IIe Commission on Human
E/Ct4 * 4/1986/21
page 55
(c) 15 January 1986
[ Original p a n ish/Z 1 gh i l
“
WiII reference to its note No.031/DR/ a G, dated 14 January 1986, takes
the liberty of enclosing wiII this communication the following documents
which unfortunately were not attached to IIe above—mentioned note
1. Document No.E/CN.4/1985/6O 1/
2. Detailed report: Santa Anita de las Canoas
3. Forensic medical reportz Mr . Hector Orlando G6nez ca litO
(A/40/865, appendix IV). 1/
‘Santa Anita las Canoas
On 20 April, on the eve of the viSit taG1IIteIIalao J2 ! ! !t !.
International , a local newspaper, La Raz6n , reported the 5 sacre of
125 campesinos at the village of Santa Anita las Canoas in the
Department of Chimaltenango. According to the report, the victi
were forced to dig a mass grave at the foot of a cliff, and after
killing them, the perpetrators set off dynamite charges which
covered the mass grave with rocks. Two days later, the newspaper
El Imparcial printed a statement by the Commander of the d
Chimaltenango Military Zone denying the event ever took place an
claiming the massacre report was part of an effort to embar1 5S
Guatemala. A third story, which appeared in L Raz6n , on 23 Apr il ,
did not refer to the story of 20 April, but instead quoted from a
police report to the effect that a “series of robberies, assaults,
and destruction of property” in the village of .
Santa Anita de las Canoas had taken place. In view of the seflOtiS
nature of the massacre report, and IIe interest on the subject
expressed by the Amnesty delegation, private investigator 5 attempted
to determine the actual events.
A review of detailed maps of Chimaltenango revealed that the
correct name of the village was in fact Finca (Fan)
Santa Anita de las Canoas, located in the norIIern, and highly
mountainous, part of the Department. Santa Jknita is part 0 the
Municipality of San Marttn Jilotepeque. The farm is not served by
an all—weather road, although a dirt road connects it with
San Martin. The road distance is probably 18 km or more. Due to
the mountainous nature of the terrain, during the most acta. period
of the insurgency, 1980—1982, Chimaltenango witnessed severe combat
between EGP and the army. Although largely pacified, there are
still reports of scattered EGP actions in the Department.
Docwuent available separately.
E/CN.4/l986/2l
page 56
According to the original report, one of the survivors of the
massacre had been hospitalized in the Departmental Hospital in
Chimaltenango. In view of this, the private investigators contacted
an American citizen who runs a health clinic in the area, and asked
a source who had served her medical internship in that hospital in
1983 to attempt to ascertain if anyone from Santa Anita had received
medical treatment in the recent past or if anyone had heard ru mours
of the alleged massacre. In both cases the information was
negative. OEe American citizen had not heard anything about the
event, and a two—week review of hospital records failed to show that
anyone from Santa Anita had been served at the Departmental Hospital.
On 26 April, the private investigators accompanied by two other
persons travelled to Santa Anita by helicopter. Due to the absence
of identifiable landmarks — the whole mountain area consists of
small villages with some isolated houses — they landed at the nearby
farm of Santa Rosario, some 4 km away, and sought directions to
Santa Anita. Local villagers were quite friendly, more so than in
most other Indian villages visited, and after giving directions they
engaged in some general talk about the weather and the forIIcoming
planting season. Towards the end of the conversation, they were
asked about any incidents in Santa Anita. The villagers said that
nothing had happened there except some robberies about a month
before. The said IIat in another nearby village, four men had been
arrested for theft by.IIe army.
From Rosario, the private investigators travelled to Santa A nita
and landed at its main housing concentration, some 40 houses
scattered over some 50 or so acres. In IIe centre of the housing
area there were several buildings, including a school. The farm was
divided into four sections with some 1,200 or so inhabitants of
which about 400 were adults and the rest children. Only about
100 children were enrolled in school and many did not attend classes
regularly. The local civil defence forces (CDF) had 145 members,
most but not all of the able—bodied males of the farm.
Communication to the outside was limited to travel on the dirt road,
and when it was usable, one or two buses or trucks made a run each
week.
During the visit, the private investigators spoke to some
25 adults and about six schoolchildren, including the schoolteacher,
the military commissioner, and IIe head of the CDF. Six
conversations including the one with the schoolteacher were in
private. The others included two or more persons. As was the case
in Rosario, the inhabitants were significantly more open and
communicative than is usual for residents of Indian villages.
Although ethnic Indians, all men and most of the children, j 0 uding
the girls, spoke fluent Spanish.
According to the villagers, the only incident to take place in
Santa Anita since 1982, when an undetermined nunter of guerrillas
and guerrilla supporters were killed in clashes, was a robbery that
took place on the night of 18 March. That night some 20 to 25 mefl
armed with automatic weapons entered the town, robbed four houses,
including one that had a small sundries store, and burned another
when its owner attempted to resist. The robbers took food, clothe 5 '
and money. The perpetrators wore civilian dress and spoke spanish
among themselves and to the Indians (Santa Anita is a
r
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 57
Cachiquel—speaking area). Almost all the residents described them
as “desconocidos” (“unknown 9 ), although one of them said they were
insurgents. No one was hurt during the robbery, although IIe family
whose house was burned out had moved to San Marttn to stay either
with friends or relatives.
After take—off, the helicopter circled over much of the
surrounding area and the private investigators attempted to find
some area that showed signs of recent slides, explosions, or raw
rock. None was found.
After ascertaining the above, the private investigators found
that a similar event had been reported in the March violence
report. OEis incident was reported in the local press in late
March. Those reports stated that 26 guerrillas had burned
nine houses in the village of Las Canoas and had escaped without
encountering the any
114. On 23 July 1985, the Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the
United Nations Office at Geneva visited the Special Bapporteur concerning the
above_mentioned allegations.
1ls OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Indonesia, which reads as follows:
“In East Timor during the past years a number of persons, after
having been arrested by the Indonesian authorities for their suspected
5 Ympathy or connection with the Frente RevolucioMria de Timor
Leste (FRETILfl) or in reprisal for alleged attacks by FRETILIN members,
ere allegedly killed in detention. Among those allegedly known to have
been killed in detention in 1984, 44 names were given. The following are
ome of those identified cases:
. Ja ne Castelo
executed in February 1984 while being detained in the district
. military command (XODIM) in Los Palos
. Moises Aranjo, Laurenco Arango, Jo Xavier and Oscar
executed on 29 May 1984
Vicente Freitas, Jacinto da Silva, Tomas da Silva
. executed on 30 May 1984 in Baubau.
COMMENT. Whatever happened in Santa Anita, it appears quite
certain that no massacre took place in recent weeks. The villagers
were not at all reticent to discuss the 1982 events, but denied that
any other incidents had taken place in the farm between 1982 and the
March robbery. OEe children's version of the events basically
matched that of IIe adults, and as they say in Guatemala “only
drunks and children ever tell the whole truth”. The children were
also quite happy and did not act as if they had lost loved ones in
the recent past. Neither the neighbours nor the hospitals gave any
indication that anything out of the ordinary had happened in the
area in recent weeks. Thus, although we do not know who robbed
Santa Anita, the private investigator who visted the fan is quite
certain that no massacre took place there as originally reported in
the press. End of comment.”
: E/CN.4/ 1986/21
page 58
: ‘ ;
In addition, approximately 100 men were reported to have been
executed in March 1984 while in the custody of Indonesian forces in the
vicinity of the village of Hamba near Bobonaro.
Furthermore, numerous persons allegedly continued to be killed by
security forces as in previous years in connection with an anti—crime
campaign. Dead bodies of suspected criminals were found in particular in
North Sumatra, East Java, West Java and in Jakarta.”
116. The following letter, dated 22 October 1985, was received from the
Permanent Representative of Indonesia to the United Nations Office at Geneva ,
) , d
HE [ Originalz English)
“ .
( ‘ :E. Referring to your letter of 12 July 1985, number G/SO 214 (33—3), in
relation to your mandate as the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on
Human Rights on summary or arbitrary executions, I would like to convey
H my Government's comments which are as follows:
1. As in IIe past, the Government of Indonesia solemnly honours
all the provisions of the Constitution and laws in respect of
H . the protection of human rights, including the right to life.
It is the determination of the Government of Indonesia strictly
to ensure the implementation of laws and regulations to protect
the rights of individuals with regard to arrests, detentions,
trials, and execution of sentences.
2. The Government of Indonesia would like to restate that the
information about the alleged killings of a number of persons 4
held in detention in the Province of East Timor as well as the ‘
alleged executions in the vicinity of the village of Hamba
during 1984 is simply untrue. The clarification for these
: allegations was already given by IIe Permanent Representative '
of Indonesia in his letter tlo.43/POL—lO/85, dated
10 January 1985. There is no need to repeat the details of
this explanation, since it is undoubtedly clear that those
allegations are part of a politically motivated campaign
against Indonesia conducted by ex—FRETILIN members in exile an4
their supporters abroad. In addition, IIose allegations are
nothing more than distorted fact, rumours and hearsay, the ,:;,
truth of which will never stand the test of independent
sources. The Indonesian Government's respect of the law andH':
rights of individuals, no less in the Province of East Tin1orr
than any other province of the country is reflected, among
other things, by IIe fact IIat persons suspected of criminal
offences are tried in civil courts. In the case of East TimQt :
almost 160 persons were sentenced on charges based on
article 110, section 1, together with article 106 of the “ ‘
Indonesian Criminal Code, from December 1963 to March l98 • .9 ;
this number, 128 persons received sentences of less than “::
seven years. Furthermore, 50 persons, previously held in .H
Comarca prison, were released in April 1985, upon the Court S)
finding of insufficient evidence.
3. With regard to the reported ‘mysterious killings', the
Government of Indonesia would like to reiterate its opinioht.v,
E/CN * 4/1986/21
page 59
contained in the letter of the Permanent Representative of
Indonesia to the United Nations in Geneva No.141//POL—040/84
dated 24 January 1984 that these killings are not in any way
directed or condoned by the Indonesian Government, because
illegal methods in combating crime as alleged are not only
against the provisions of the Constitution, but are also in
contravention of the due process of law for each and every
Indonesian.
It is our sincere hope that IIe above comments will clarify the
allegations referred to in your letter and therefore enable you to
prepare an impartial and objective report for the forty—second session of
IIe Commission on Human Rights.”
117. On 5 November 1985 i TTs January 1986, IIe representative of the
Government of Indonesia and the Permanent Representative of Indonesia to the
United Nations Office at Geneva visited IIe Special Rapporteur concerning the
above-mentioned allegations.
118. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to the Islamic Republic of Iran, which reads as follows:
“In 1985 a number of persons were reported to have been executed
secretly or publicly without any trial or after trials which did not
provide safeguards to protect the rights of the defendants. It was
alleged that during 1984 580 persons were known to have been executed in
this manner. In April and May 1985 more than 300 persons were allegedly
executed in Evin Prison in Tehran.”
119. No reply has been received f rota the Government of the
Islamic Republic of Iran.
-20. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
1 regard to Iraq, which reads as follows:
“A number of persons were reported to have been executed without
charge or a trial in February and March 1985. Those who were executed
were said to be members of the 1 urdish IDemocratic Party ( l C D ? ), mei ers of
the Al—Hakim family and members of the Assyrian community. The names of
those executed were given as follows;
1. Members of XDP executed in February:
(a) Muhammad ‘Al Zahir
(b) Hadji Ahmad Osman
(c) Yhaya Yunis
(d) A u Aziz Muhammad
. (e) Hu$sajn Salih Mustaf a
. (f) Behir Sinjari
(g) Abdallah Hemed ‘Abdallah
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 60
2. Members of 1 DP executed in the second week of March:
(a) Icamal Rassoul
(b) Sa leh Muhammad Amin Abd fl—Karim
Cc) Gaf four Muhammad Saleh
3. Members of KDP executed on 31 March:
(a) Karim Isma t il
(b) Muhammad Ibrahim Salih
Cc) Ahmad Yasin ‘Abdallah
Cd) Mahmud flasan Yunis
Ce) Hamad Hussain
4. Members of the Al—Hakim family executed on 5 March:
(a) Sayyid ‘flbd Al—Hadi Al—Halcim
(b) Sayyid Hassan Al-Hakim
Cc) Sayyid Hussain Al—Hakim .
Cd) Sayyid Muhammad Rida Al—Hakim
Ce) Sayyid Muhammad Al-Hakim
(f) Sayyid Sahib Al-Hakim
(g) Sayyid Dhia Al-Hakim
(h) Sayyid Baha Al-Hakim
Ci) Sayyid Muhammad Au A1—Sayyid Jawad Al—liakim . I
(j) Sayyid MaDid A1-Sayyid Mahmud Al—Hakim
2
5. Members of the Assyrian community:
(a) Yussuf Toma Hurmuz
(b) Youbert flenyamtn Shleiman
Cc) Yuhanna Isho Jajo.”
121. OEe following reply, dated 23 october 1985, was received from the
Permanent Mission of Iraq to the United Nations Office at Geneva: :
(Original: Arabic] ‘
With regard to the note dated 12 July 1985 received from the
Centre for Huittan Rights concerning allegations of execution without trial
or without charges being brought against the accused, the reply of the
Iraqi authorities to those allegations is as follows
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 61
We wish to state IIat we have no information concerning the said
members of the so—called Kurdistan Democratic Party, with the exception
of
1. Yahya Yunis Qasim
2. iCamal Rassoul Mimad
3. A u Aziz Muhammad
who were sentenced to death and executed for engaging in acts of sabotage
that are punishable under Iraqi law. At the time of their arrest, they
were found to be in possession of weapons and explosives and in the act
of ..
Hussain Salih Mustafa was sentenced in abs nti for IIe commission of
offences prejudicial to the security and integrity of the State after
evading military service. He is still a fugitive from justice.
WiII regard to the other allegations concerning executions on
31 March 1985, we wish to inform the Centre that the following persons;
1. Abdul Karim Ismail
2. Mahmoud Salih Ibrahit
3. Mahmoud Hussain yunis
were sentenced to death and executed for engaging in acts of sabotage
carrying weapons and explosives and attacking the homes of citizens in
peaceful villages. During IIe course of their armed assaults, they
murdered the headman of one of the villages. They also took part in acts
of sabotage aimed at prejudicing national security and sovereignty.
The following members of the Assyrian community ;
1. Yusuf Toma Uurmuz .
2. Yubert Benyamin Shleiman Al-Ashuti
3. Yuhanna Ishu Shimoun
we;e sentenced to death and executed for criminal conspiracy prejudicial
to the independence, unity and territorial integrity of Iraq through
their estab1isj ent of a hostile movement aimed at secession by force.
they transported weapons and explosives and engaged in acts of sabotage
agaJj 5 public and private establishments and institutions.
In this connection, we wish to point out that, in each of the above
cases, sentence was passed by a competent court which observed all the
prescribed legal procedures and safeguards for the defence of the accused
iS Stipulated in IIe Iraqi constitution and the laws in force. the court
also appointed attorneys to defend IIem.
WiII regard to the execution of the following 10 members of the
‘tim family:
E/CN.4/l996/21
. page 62
. .
[ ‘ 1. Abdul Hadi Muhsin Mahdi Salih ‘Al—Hakim
2. Hasan Abdul Hadi Muhsin Mahdi Al—Hakim
3. Hussain lOEdul Hadj Muhsjn Mahdi. Al-flakim
4. Muhammad Ridha Muhammad Hussain Said Al—Hakim
5. Muhammad Muhammad Hussain Said Al-liakim
6. Abdus-Sahib Muhammed Said Al—Hakim
7. Dhia ud-Din ICamal ud—Din Yusuf Muhsin Al-Hakim
8. Baha ud—Din JCamal nd-Din Yusuf Mubsin Al—Hakim
9. Muhammad A3.i Said Jawad Mahmoud Al—Thakim ,
10 Ma)eed Mahmoud Mahdt Salih Al—Hakim
, , ,ifi they were sentenced to death and executed for criminally conspiring to
stir up sedition, to promote a spirit of odious sectarian separatism and
to establish a hostile organization known as the ‘Iraqi Mujahidin
::‘ Movement', the principal aim of which is to bring about the overthrow by
: force of IIe present legitimate constitutional system of government in
Iraq. They brought weapons and explosives into the country from abroad
“ : and distributed them among saboteurs with a view to provoking unrest and
, ‘ , sedition amd maliciously stirring up sectarian bigotry. They acted as
spies for the Iranian r&gime, which is at war with Iraq, and thereby
, ‘:j”H. co tted high treason against their country. They also arranged for
some Iraqi military personnel on IIe battlefields to defect to the
Iranian side in tine of war.”
122. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a su mmary of the allegations received
in regard to Nigeria, which reads as follows:
“In 1984 at least 66 persons were allegedly executed after a trial
:: by the special tribunals which reportedly do not permit the right to
appeal to a higher tribunal. On 10 April 1985 three persons, sentenced
to death by one of the special tribunals, described as the ‘Miscellaneous
Offences Tribunal', were allegedly executed in Lagos on 10 April 1985.
: The names of the three were given as: Bernard Ogedengbe,
.‘ Bartholomew Azubike Owoh and Akanni Ojelope. The ‘Miscellaneous Offences
Tribunal', created by Supreme Military Council Decree No. 20, promulgated
: in July 1984, does not allow the right to appeal to a higher tribunal.”
123. OEe following letter, dated 25 September 1985, was received from the
Permanent Mission of Nigeria to the United Nations Of fice at Geneva :
[ Original: Englishi
“Further to your letter Ref .No.G/SO 214 (33—3) of 24 July 1985, and
the attachment in respect of persons convicted under Miscellaneous
Offences (Decree No.20), I wish to refer you to our
letter Ref .No,GI0. ll/CON/VOL.flV dated 20 March 1985 and to reiterate
once again that the Tribunal, presided over by a Thigh Court Judge, is
duly constituted under the laws of the Federation. Its rules of
procedure also guarantee, to both the prosecution and the defence, equal
. — ——.. — . . .— —— — ...—. .. ..——. — . ————..—— — .—..—— ——..————
E/CbT. 4/1986/21
page 63
rights of audience, examination in chief and cross—examination. Also, in
accordance with section 1 (2), appeal lies, as of right, to the Supreme
Military Council (now known as the Armed Forces Ruling Council) which has
the right to confirm, vary or totally disallow a sentence imposed by IIe
tribunal.
With regard to the three persons, referred to in the Communication
attached to your letter, who were executed on 10 April 1983, they were
tried and found guilty by a duly constituted Tribunal presided over by a
High Court Judge. Furthermore, their executions were only carried out
after a confirmation of their sentences by the Supreme Military Council
to which appeal lies as of right in accordance with the appropriate
section_referred—to—earlier. —It—is —to -be-noted —however;thatOEnOEnoIIer
similar case, the Supreme Military Council reduced the death sentence to
life imprisonment.
In the light of the above , the allegations of the denial of the
right of appeal under Decree No.20 are groundless-
. . .
. . .
124 the Special Rapporteur transmitted a suimuary of the allegations received
in regard to Paraguay, which reads as followss
‘In February 1985 a person whose name was given as
Pablo Martinez ljiaz, 26, allegedly died in custody as a result of
continuous beatings by police personnel after having been arrested by
police in PirayII A medical certificate reportedly gave the cause of
death as trauniatismo craneo—encefflico (trauma to the head). While it
was officially stated that Pablo Martinez Diaz committed suicide in the
111 police cell by hanging himself, his family was said to have taken legal
action through the court to determine the cause and circumstances of his
death “
. OEe following letter dated 6 September 1985, was received from the
Stry of Foreign Affairs of Paraguay:
[ Original: Spanish]
‘ I refer to your communication G/SO.214 (33—3) of 24 July 1985,
: !!questi g information from our country on the case of
1?lo Martinez o!az, who is reported to have died while in police
!,Stody in Pirayii, Cordillera Department.
I have the honour to inform you that Mr Martinez Diaz was detained
police station of Piray , when he was found to be in a state of
r 9 ati0It . The police station report stated that the cause of death
: i,e: , individual in guestj.on was suicide by hanging. OEe doctor from
Pirayi Uealth Centre concurred in that opinion but in his medical
did not exclude the possibility of some other cause of
4l7. : The body of the deceased was later transferred on the initiative
.: Pirayd Chief of Police to the Hospital de Clinicas in Asunci6n,
ran, autopsy was performed which showed the cause of death to have
brain injury. In view of the apparent contradiction between the
‘%tt&fjcates which raised doubts about the cause of
me: Diaz's death and in order to clarify responsibilities in the
State Prosecutors Department instituted proceedings against
ayu Chief of Police.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 64
OEe case is being heard in the Court of First Instance for Criminal
Cases before the third judge, Mr. Edxnundo Vittone (Clerk to the Court,
Mr. C ceres). I trust that this information meets your requirements.
“
126. On 1 November 1985, the Permanent Representative of Paraguay to the
United Nations Of fice at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur concerning the
above—mentioned allegation.
127. The Special Papporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to Peru, which reads as follows:
were killed or found dead in an ‘emergency zone' including provinces of
. . . Ayacucho, Apurimac and Huancavelica departments, where a guerrilla group
was active. Several of these victi were allegedly killed by the
H guerrilla group, in addition security forces (military or police) are
said to be responsible for a number of such deaths. Some of those
H persons were found dead in dumping grounds and mass graves, often with
signs of torture, after having been detained by the security forces or
having disappeared. The names of more than 400 people were given as
having been detained and subsquently found dead in the emegency zone
since January 1983.”
128. The Special Rapporteur received, from the Permanent Mission of Pen at
the United Nations Office at Geneva, a copy of the statement made by the
President at his inauguration on 28 July 1985. The relevant part of the
statement reads as follows:
(Original: Spanish]
I I
. . .
OEe use of death as a means to an end is unacceptable under a
democratic system. The fact that we are here to fight for the people and
for justice is proof that social justice can be achieved under a
democracy The severity of the law will be applied both to those who
violate human rights by killings, extrajudicia]. executions and torture
and through abuse of their functions; for it is not necessary to fall
into barbarism in order to fight barbarism. We know, nevertheless, that
there are many innocent people unjustly accused of terrorism who have
been prevented from proving their innocence by delays in the law; and I
hereby announce that a fully independent Peace Commission shall be
appointed forthwith, made up of jurists, human rights institutions and
political groups. It will have a twofold mission; first, to look into
the position of persons who feel themselves to be innocent and to propose
an immediate solution to the authorities with a view to making a clear
distinction between what constitutes acts of terrorism or complicity in
it and what should be classified as political offences, for which there
are democratic party activists now in prison, unjustly charged with
terrorism; and second, to build a bridge of entreaty and dialogue with a
view to persuading those who have taken the wrong path to return to ‘
democracy. Subject to its proposals and conclusions, and as soon as the.
necessary conditions obtain, we shall be prepared to consider petitions' .
for mercy, pardon and amnesty from those who have actually committed the
of fence of terrorism, with the State using tools calculated to promote
understanding among Peruvians.”
I ‘ 7
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 65
129. the following replies dated 18 July, 17 September [ 23, 20 September,
ja November, 26 November, 9 December and 10 December 1985, were received from
the permanent Mission of Peru to the Unitea Nations Office at Geneva:
(a) 18 July 1985
[ Original: Spanish)
“
It is my duty to reaffirm ... Peru's position of principle in
respect of human rights and the special importance which it attaches to
the problem of summary
may take place. My Governmet t accordingly also wishes to reiterate its
appreciation of the work you are doing.
Given the seriousness of the accusation referred to, I must make it
clear that the Government of Peru requires any allegations forwarded to
it to contain all the relevant details in your possession, so as to
enable the allegations to be confirmed or denied. OEis is because the
Peruvian Government, which has the greatest possible respect for IIe
observance of human rights, cannot go on allowing them to be manipulated
by interested persons or organizations in so important a forum as the
Commission on Human Rights, which could be used as a sounding board on
behalf of terrorist movements and their activities directed towards
massive violations of the most basic human rights with a view to the
destabilization of a legally elected democratic Government.
Under Peru's legal system, it rests with the Judicial Branch to
decide the guilt or innocence of accused persons. OEerefore, with a view
to the investigation of these allegations, I must repeat the request
contained in note NNUU/50 of 12 December 1984 and ask you once more to be
good enough to provide specific information on the persons involved in
and the circumstances of the alleged summary executions in the emergency
zone
I would remind you that the mere transmittal of the allegations
referred to unnecessarily damages the image of r gimes which, like
Pen's, are an expression of their citizens' will and which are thus
; complying with one of the most important human rights, the right to
freely elect a government, which forms the basis and the guarantee for
the fulfilment of the other human rights.
ill 17 September 1985
[ orig inali Spanish]
, “
, , 4 . .
In this regard, I have the honour to inform you that, by
PrSme resolution No. 221/85/JUSTICOE of 14 September 1985, the
eace Commission has been set up as an advisory and consultative body of
0 ffice of the President of the Republic and that it is composed of
; 01bowing persons:
Mr. Mario Su rez Castaneyra, who will act as the Chairman,
Monseigneur Augusta Beuzeville Perro;
Mr. Diego Garcia Say n;
Mr. C&sar Rodriguez Rabanal;
Mr. Alberto Giesecke Matto; and
Mr. Fernando Cabieses Molina.
OEe Commission will have the following functions:
(a) To examine the legal status of persons who are arrested for
terrorist acts and claim to be innocent, and to propose a solution to the
authorities for drawing a distinction between acts of terrorism or
complicity IIeretn and acts IIat pqld_be_classifjed -as —politicat TctII'j
(b) To expedite with the judiciary and without prejudice to its
independence, trials of citizens charged with the offence of terrorism,
Cc) To open up avenues of dialogue with a view to persuading those
who resort to violence and terrorism to return to democracy and the life
of the social community in accordance wiII the Constitution and the laws
of IIe Republic;
(d) To channel and bring before the authorities such complaints as
are or may be submitted regarding human rights violations involving
killings, extrajudicial executions, disappearances of persons, torture
and abuse of power by the authorities;
Ce) To review Legislative Decree No. 046 and propose such
amendments as are deemed necessary;
detention;
(g) To report on the position of victims of acts of violence, and
also of their relatives, and to propose measures for adoption;
I I) To advise the President of the Republic in any matters on which
he is consulted in connection with the problem of subversion and
enforcement of human rights.
The Peace Commission is also free to organize its own work and is
empowered to set up sub—committees and appoint advisers to assist it ix' .
the performance of its functions.
... ;,,
(f) To report on the conditions and circumstances in places of
‘‘
(c) 17 September 1985
t originalt Spanish]
,, . . . :
I have the honour to transmit, for your information, two
issued by the Government of Peru on 12 and 15 September 1985 erning” :4
the events that occurred recently in the district of Pacayacu; ;,.
‘Press release issued by the Secretary to IIe Of f ice of the
President of the Republic: ,
. . I
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 66
‘ . .
. , , .
pr
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 67
1. The Government is resolute in its determination to guarantee
that exclusively lawful and constitutional means are used in the
fight against terrorism.
2. Following the discovery of seven bodies in a common grave in
the Pacayacu area, the President has ordered a thorough
investigation, the results of which must be announced within the
next 72 hours.
3. As regards the reports of the alleged deaths of 69 persons in
action by the security forces in the district of Ancosmarca, the
Office of the President of the Republic has likewise ordered an
Xti4atibrrvitrd ta sr ddttc&rwfth in thtOE ext
seven days and, in addition, has directed:
OEat the Head of IIe Second Military Region,
Major General Sinesio Jarama D vila, the Military Political
Head of the Region, Brigadier General Wilfredo Mon Orzo, and
the chiefs of the operations carried out in IIe district of
Ancosmarca and adjoining areas report on IIe matter to the
legislature, for which purpose a joint meeting of the Defence
and Human Rights Committees of the two Chambers has been
requested. In this connection, IIe Office of the President of
the Republic is making the necessary arrangements with the
speakers of the House of Representatives and the Senate.
4. OEe Government reaffirms its determination to punish any
arbitrary action or violation of human rights that may be or has
been committed.
Lima, 12 September 1985'
‘Official Peruvian Government communiqu :
1. The President of the Republic and the Council of Ministers of
State have today received from the Joint Command of the Armed Forces
the written report requested regarding the finding of seven bodies
in Pacayacu.
This report points to the clear responsibility of three army
officers and a driver, who have been brought before the courts.
2. In addition, IIe verbal report that was made reveals that, on
the instructions of the previous Government, the facts about the
. :. . struggle against subversion have been kept secret. The way in which
the forces of subversion recruit their members has not been made
public. OEere have been no reports about how they carry out their
actions by using large numbers of poorly armed members of the
population. The large number of casualties that have occurred in
the past three years have not been reported, which means that they
have not been identified or documented but have been declared
missing, and consequently the armed forces have been portrayed as
acting in a genocidal manner, thereby doing much harm to their
image, which, in the opinion of the Government, must not be
tarnished.
3. All of this indicates that IIe previous Government bears a
heavy responsibility to the Nation for keeping it misinformed and
—
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 68
the present Government furIIer considers that the adoption of this
strategy means that the responsibility of the Chief of the Joint
Command of the Armed Forces as a member of the National Defence
Council is involved.
For this reason the Government has decided, with a view to
substantial changes in the anti—subversive strategy, to replace the
Chief of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces, for which reason the
officer who filled the post has asked to be allowed to retire.
4. OEe Government reiterates its determination to continue its
vigorous struggle against subversion without committing any excesses
be
persons who are indicted for the offence of terrorism and so far
have not, save for a very small number, been sentenced.
Lima, 15 september 1985.' .
‘‘
(d) 20 september 1985
[ Originals Spanish]
“I have the honour to transmit to you a communiqu from the Joint
Command of the Peruvian Armed Forces concerning the events that occurred
at Accomarca:
‘1. According to a report from the Inspectorate of the Second
Infantry Division (Ayacucho), it was established at 1700 hours today
that Second Lieutenant Telmo Hurtado Hurtado, a junior officer
commanding a patrol, was responsible for the death of approximately
40 civilians in the Accorharca area on 14 August last.
2. The inquiries establish that the officer responsible concealed
this fact in his report on the operation, with the result that the
reports submitted by Major General Sinesio Jarama D vila and
Brigadier General Wilfredo I4ori Orzo to the congressional committees
today did not refer to this incident as they were unaware of it.
3. OEe Joint Comm&nd of the Armed Forces has ordered that a
thorough investigation be carried out in order to clarify all the
circumstances of the case and bring those responsible to justice.
4 The Commanding Officer of the Central National security Zone,
Major General Sinesio Jarama D vi1a, and the Military Political Head
of National Security Sub—Zone No. 5, Brigadier General Waif redo Marl
Orzo, have today been relieved of their duties
5 A request that he be permitted to retire, submitted by
Brigadier General Walf redo Mon Orzo, Military Political Head of
Security Sub—Zone No 5 to the General Headquarters of the Army has ..,
today been accepted ‘
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 69
(e) 18 November 1985
tOriginal : Spanish]
I have the honour to transmit for your information, IIe text of
Official Communications Nos. 17 and 19 of the Joint Command of the Armed
Forces of my country, dated 22 and 27 November respectively, concerning
the surrender of a large group of terrorists, who have laid down their
arms and given themselves up to the forces of order.
‘OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
No. 0l7-CCFFA/RRPp
1. On 19 October 1985, during an operation by the forces of order
in the locality of Llochegua, a large subversive group laid down its
arms and surrendered.
2. The terrorist group, which capitulated unconditionally, is made
up of 51 male combatants accompanied by 64 women, both combatants
and supporters, 14 children over 10 years of age and 45 children
under 10 years of age. At present they have been distributed among
the anti—guerrilla bases of Llochegua and IIe District of
Coraz6n de Pampa where they are being given protection and means of
subsistence until a decision is taken concerning their return to
work in safety.
3. According to statements by members of this terrorist group,
their defection is mainly due to a constant failure on the part of
the Sendero leaders to keep their promises IIis has tired and
frustrated their members, who have realized the uselessness of their
struggle and have expressed the desire to return as soon as possible
to their agricultural occupations and contribute productively to the
development of their people in peace and in law and order.
Lima, 22 October 1985
PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICE OF THE CCFFAA.'
‘OFFICIAL COMMUNICATION
No. 0l9—CCFFA/RRPp
1. On 25 October 1985, members of the Civil Defence of
Coraz6n de Pampa rescued 21 men and 43 women from the subversive
Sendero movement 7 they were taken to the Marines' anti—guerrilla
base at Llochegua.
2. OEree guerrilla chiefs subsequently gave themselves up to the
personnel of the anti—guerrilla base of Llochegua. Large quantities
of subversive propaganda, homemade grenades and three rifles were
Seized from the persons rescued and from the leaders who surrendered.
3. The forces of order will give the subversive group protection
and means of subsistence until a decision is taken concerning their
T I !
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 70
return to work in safety, as well as the delivery to the appropriate
authorities of the persons held responsible.
Lima, 27 October 1985 .
PUBLIC REaTIOIqS OFFICE OF THE CCFFAA'
, ,
(f) 26 November 1985
(Original: Spanish]
I have the honour to transmit for your information the text of
Official Communication No. ll—Cc0MIN, dated 8 November 1985:
‘The Ministry of the Interior informs the public of the
following; .
Continuing IIe efforts for peace undertaken by IIe Government, at
the meeting of the Council of Ministers of this date it has been
decided not to renew the state of emergency in the Province of
Pasco, Department of Cer n de Pasco.'
ti
(g) 9 December 1985
(Original Spanish ]
,‘
I have the honour to inform you that the Ministry of Justice of Peru
has issued Ministerial Resolution 280—85—JUS, dated 29 November 1985,
published in the Official Gazette El Peruarto of 7 December 1985, in which
approval is given, as from 1986, for the publication of the official
version of the political Constitution of Pen in the Peruvian telephone
directory. This edition will also include the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
This measure is part of a broad information and education campaign
concerning the provisions of the Constitution and laws relating to human
rights, which the Government of my country has undertaken ... ,‘
(h) 10 December 1985
(Originals Spanish ]
“
I have the honour to inform you that on 6 December 1985 the
General Assembly of the Organization of Mterican States adopted a
resolution on the situation of human rights in Junerica, of which I would
like to reproduce paragraph 9 below:
I
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 71
‘Welcomes the measures adopted by the Constitutional Government of
Pen since 28 July 1985 with a view to guaranteeing full respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms and strengthening the rule of
law and democracy in its national territory'
‘‘
130. On 25 July 1985, 4 November 1985 and 15 January 1986 the representative
of the Government of Pen visited the Special Rapporteur concerning the
above—mentioned allegations.
131. The Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations Office at
Geneva met the Special Rapporteur on 15 January 1986 and, among the steps
._being ..taken to,sstablish,conditions conduci ye to reducing the incidence of
summary or arbitrary executions, as stated in the letter, he emphasized:
(a) The steps taken by IIe President to terminate the services of any
officers who were in any way responsible for summary or arbitrary executions,
(b) OEe ordering of investigations into the incidences of summary or
arbitrary executions;
Cc) OEe prosecution of some of those involved in such incidences of
summary or arbitrary executions:
Cd) The setting up of the Peace Commission whose aims and objectives
include channelling and bringing before the authorities such complaints as
regard human rights violations involving killings, extrajudicial executions,
etc. ; and
Ce) To open a dialogue with those who resort to violence and terrorism.
132. In addition, the Special Rapporteur received information materials,
newspaper and magazine articles, etc., from the Permanent Mission of Peru to
, the United Nations Office at Geneva concerning the situation in Peru.
. )
133. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to the Philippines, which reads as follows:
‘A considerable number of persons were reported to have been killed
as in past years by military and paramilitary units under the military
command. Most of those killed were farmers and other civilians including
politicians. The victims were either shot to death on the spot or found
dead after having been arrested or detained. In 1984 more than 400
Persons were allegedly known to have been killed in such a manner.
Several of the names of those killed in the past year were given as
follows:
1. Elvie Degit (16) (Rimamaylan, Negros Occidental)
abducted and found dead in January 1985 .
2. Leonardo Tagapan (28) and Arcelos Babion (28), (Cagayan de Oro,
Mindanao)
arrested in February 1984 and their dead bodies with multiple
gunshot wounds and skull fracture given to a funeral parlour in
March 1984
3. Jojie Paduano and Janilyn Enricjuez (Visayas)
killed in May 1984 after having been raped allegedly
C
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 72
by membersof the 47th Infantry Brigade of the Army and the
Integrated Civilian Home Defence Force (ICHDF)
4. Danilo Deldoc and Jose and Perlita de la Cruz (Palayan City,
Nueva Ecija)
arrested in Manila in May 1984 and their bodies hung on a
bridge in Pa layan City
5. Julian and Marcelina Bonane and their children, Henrieta (20),
Daniel (17) and Carlito (15) (Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental)
killed on 17 March 1984 allegedly by a member of the Philippine
constabulary and four members of iawF
‘boeoehfldrexvrRonaldo--(B)—and Marietta
(6) (Carmen, Jituenez, Misamis Occidental)
killed an March 1984 allegedly by members of ICHDr
7 Ernesto Pijeda (25) (Isabela, Negros Occidental)
arrested in December 1984 by the 3rd Scout Rangers detachment
and found dead on 23 December 1984 The body carried signs of
torture as well as multiple stab wounds
8. Nine persons (Langoni, Negros Occidental)
shot dead allegedly by the Philippine Constabulary (PC)
9 Alexander Orcullo (38) (Mandug, Davac, Mindanao)
shot dead on 19 October 1984 allegedly by IIe
People's Liberation Organization (PLO) which was under the
control of the military F
10 Five members of a group of squatter families taking shelter an
a chapel in Davao (Msndanao)
shot dead on 27 November 1984 allegedly by ICNDF
11. Fr Tu llio Favali (38) (North Cotabato)
shot dead on 11 April 1985 by members of ICHDF.”.
134. The following replies, dated 10 December 1985, 12 December 1985 and :
17 January 1986, were received from the Permanent Mission of the Philippines
to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
(a) 10 December 1985
(Originali English) 4
‘ .4
“I would like to refer to your letter of 15 october 1985 and in
connection with the request for intervention addressed to the Ph i l ippine
Government by Mr. S.A. Amos Wako concerning alleged summary or arbitrary . 1
execution in the Philippines, have the honour to submit the enclosed “I
information concerning the cases of Mr. Alexander Orcullo,
Fr. TulIlo Favali and nine persons in Langoni, Negros Occidental.
I am confident that this information will be taken into account by
the Special Rapporteur in his report to the Commission on Human Rights.
..
. . .
‘CASE TITLE: ORCULLO, Alexander
oetails of Case:
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 73
The late barangay Captain Alexander Orcullo of barangay Mandug,
Davao City, was killed on 19 october 1984 in Davao City by 9, or less
than 10 unidentified persons with the use of high—powered firearms.
Barangay Captain Orcullo was driving his car accompanied by his wife,
a three—year—old son en route to Davao Development Foundation Village
Mandug when he was flagged down by armed men along the road.
I capitan tnggo and his armed followers were engaged in the collection
bf tong money particularly from t4andug residents. With the support of
Colonel Andres Superable, the then Metrodiscom Commander, a 17—man ICHDF
llroup was organized to counteract IIe activities of Icapitan Inggo. It
was eventually disarmed one by one by unidentified armed men. During IIe
early part of 1984 Kapitan Inggo and his armed followers returned to the
area and started harassing the civilians. Panic among civilians ensued
and evacuation in some areas took place. Threats against the life of
barangay Captain Alex Orcullo became imminent and real to the extent that
he (orcuno) evacuated to Davao City proper.
and
in
At the time of his death, barangay Captain Alexander Orcullo was the
Chairman of Hukom Demokrasya, a Southern Mindanao Chapter of the Militant
NASJFD , ;_..SecXetarytGeneraL .OL. ,the
of the National Council of NMFD and CORD; National—Secretary General of
the Makabayang Alyiansa (MA) which is a national politicalparty of the
opposition group and Editor of the defunct Mindaweek , a local weekly
tabloid based in Davao City. He was Mindanao's well—known
anti—administration leader and practically engaged in all sorts of
strikes and demonstrations in IIat area. He was elected in 1980 as
barangay Captain of Mandug, Davao City, and resided in the Development
Foundation (DDF), a housing foundation for which he served as
consultant. Captain Alexander Orcullo was once very active against the
armed group of Ahubakar Icarsolo, also known as “Kapitan Inggo”, a former
Bangsa Moro Army Commander and rebel returnee.
An interview with IIe representative of the Board of Trustees of the
Davao Development Foundation at Mandug disclosed that two days prior to
the killing of Captain Orcullo, the latter confided that his life was in
danger, so much so that Kapitan Inggo and a certain Usman Sali even
announced to the residents of Mandug that they would skin him (Orcullo)
alive. Investigations also disclosed that prior to the killing of
barangay Captain orcullo, a certain barangay Dante Panlilio of Mandug wa S
lso killed. Two security officers of Lapanday plantation were also
illed in the persons of Cris Dacoycoy (former Captain of the Philippine
Army) and a certain Noel Flores. Pfc. Herenia Balod and Patrolman
Iren 0 Rosette, both merIIers of the Field Force Detachment of Mandug were
a1 30 killed.
Based on the investigation, it is reported that the armed group that
, ;led barangay Captain Alexander Orcullo were members of l3angsa Moro
t Under Kapitan Inggo, to wit:
. Feuds existing between Alexander Orcullo and the group of
Kapitan Inggo.
Leadership/power supremacy in Mandug areas. It appears from
the interview by the investigating team that the first barangay
,
H E/CN.4/ 1986/21
. ; page74
Councillor of barangay Mandug who is next in line to barangay
Alexander Orcullo is a Muslim and a first cousin of Usman Sali,
one of the alleged killers of Alexander Orcullo. Hence, this
revenge angle.
3. Revenge against barangay Captain Orcullo by Kapitan Inggo and
his followers. There was an incident some time back when
H Muslim houses at barangay Tigatto were sprayed with bullets by
. ! : ! . alleged members of the New Peoples Army (NPA), and it was
: suspected that the mastermind was Alexander Orcullo. Hence,
this revenge angle
H STATUS OF CASE/RESPONDENTS:
HHoeere was no case yet being filed. The latest progress report of
H the Commanding Off icer, PC/IN? CIS to ACSAFP, is as follows:
. , In his report, Col. Hermogenes B. Peralta Jr. reported that
: : Estanislao Viuvicencio, allegedly a former NPA member and close associate
‘ : , r, of barangay Captain Alexander Orcullo, was subjected to a debriefing
‘ ‘HH through the assistance of C2. During the debriefing,
: Estanislao Viuvicencio claimed that the political work conducted by the
Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)/NPA elements resulted in the
conversion of several drivers and operators of VODTR)WCO being managed by
‘ . : barangay Captain Alexander Orcullo as either “mass activists” or members . ,
of CPP.
. . Viuvicencio also averred that one Alex Fernandez, a member of the
Sparrow Unit, Davao City, revealed to him that Orcullo was killed by ..‘
Salt, accompanied by Sand Darama and three others who dressed up in
military uniform at the back of CR2 headquarters in Davao city. it . , .:‘ , ,
appears from the report IIat the latest information linking Sali to the
killing, dovetails with the report submitted by the RPC investigation.
Ccl. Hermogenes B Peralta, Commanding Officer of CIS, directed the
11th Criminal Investigation Service to follow up the investigation of the
case.'
‘Case. Killing of nine persons in attic Langoni, Barrio Inayawan,
Cauayan, Negros Occidental
(a) on 23 May 1984, the Bulletin Today , carried a news item HI
containing alleged accounts of local residents in Langoni, that nine
persons were picked up by soldiers after they had voted in Barrio Lambo
and while on their way to play basketball they were said to have been -
stripped of their shirts, and with their hands bound in front, paraded.
through the streets of Inayawan and led onto the beach and the detachmGn H
hea6quarters along the national highway. Three hours later, at about ,
7 p.m., volleys of gun—fire were heard. The next morning, nine bodieS i
were found sprawled in the detachment grounds. The dead bodies were
identified as those of Alejandro Ginllermo, Arinando Guillermo,
Eulogio Macrinar, Mario Jamen, Rodolfo Jamen, Alf redo Nunez, H # .
Abundo Aldaya, Antonio Oyas, and Bibiano Fajardo.
(b) The Military Regional Command No. 6 (BECOM 6) conducted an
investigation of the case and recommended that court martial proceedint 5
be instituted against the military personnel involved. This H
recommendation was approved by the Chief Judge Advocate (CJA). The
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 75
pretrial investigation was conducted on 17 August 1984. Meanwhile, the
respondent soldiers were relieved of their duty assignment and
5 ubsequently placed under arrest status.
Cc) The case was referred to a General Court Martial for trial.
the Philippine Constabulary officers and enlisted men charged with
violation of Articles of War 94 before the General Court Martial of
RZCOM 6 were: Captain Sahiroin Salem, 2Lt. Aquilino Pastolero,
Sscyt. Eduardo Verano, C2C Edgardo Honteria, C2C Jose Man Lasapin,
c2C Ernesto Ferreris, C2C Toribio Catublas, C2C German Magbanua,
C2C Geronimo Palomar, and Col. Felomino Padilla. Hearings of IIe case
were conducted on the following dates: 8 and 9 November 1984; 6 and
7 December 1984, and 11 and 12 January 1985. During said hearings, three
• tnayawan, Cauayan who testified on the supposed killing of the nine
victims. (2) Dr. Reymundo Guerero, who testified on the wounds sustained
t } by the victims that caused their deaths 1 and (3) Maj. Perfecto Quiaoit,
: : who testified to having administered the sworn statements of persons
investigated. None of the prosecution witnesses appeared,
notwithstanding the subpoenas which were duly served. During the
7 December 1984 hearing, IIe defence manifested before the court the
following: (1) to order the Prosecution to rest its case and (2) a
motion for the dismissal of the case. The court denied this motion.
,. Cd) On 11 January 1985, the defence moved for the dismissal of the
case The court after deliberation granted the motion of the defence for
the dismissal of the case for insufficiency of evidence. The court
further ordered the lifting of the technical arrest order against the
respondents.'
‘Case, Killing of Fr. Julio Favali on 11 April 1985
A. The intensive investigation conducted by the Military reveal
e: following background of the case:
Fr.. Julio Favali was an Italian and parish priest of Tulunan,
5: . otabato.
At about 17 90 hours on 11 April 1985, Fr. Favali was allegedly
,9ned to go to Earangay La Esperanza, Tulunan, North Cotabato to
an altercation between Edilberto Manero, a former member of the
,flrated Civilian Home Defence Force in OElunan, and a certain
,110,cRobles, a tailor of the same place. Reportedly, Manero confronted
tfor being implicated as a member of the New People's J .rmy ( t WA)
:as alias “Banter' which appeared in a placard found hanging along
2Z i .onal highway with markings “Mabuhay ang t WA” (“Long Live the
&c, nd “Bantel vs. Edel”. During IIe argument, Nanero drew a firearm
ired at Robles hitting a finger and right ear when Robles attempted
‘ le with said firearm. Robles however managed to escape and take
:in a nearby house. Fr. Favali arrived and entered the house to
!IIe cause of the trouble. In the meantime, his service motorcycle
iaa by the armed companions of Manero who were reportedly under
,. i ence of lictuor at that time. After a few minutes, Fr. Favali
yffom the house was shot in the head and different parts of the
ing his instant death.
. . ,
The Ministry of National Defence undertook an immediate man
‘the suspects and by July 1985 all eight suspects,
EJCN.4/1986/2l
page 76
Norberto Manero, Jr., Edilberto Manero, E lpidio I4anero, Rudy Legues,
severino Legues, Efren Pleffiago, Amay Bedaflo, and Rudy Espia had been
arrested and detained in the provincial gaol of North Cotabato.
C. On 30 september 1985, criminal charges of murder and frustrated
homicide were filed against these persons before Branch 17, Regional
Trial Court, North Cotabato. The arraignment of the accused was
conducted on 3 october 1985. All of the accused pleaded not guilty of
the offence they were charged with, The hearing on the motion for bail
was scheduled for 2, 6, 7 and 8 November 1985. The arraignment of the
accused was attended by more or less 200 people including 20 PIME fathers
with a certain Mr. Giacomo Pelasare from the Italian Embassy as well as
I I ) 12 December 1985
[ Originals English I
1 'in response to your letter of 15 December 1986, and further to our
letter of 10 December 1985 wherein we submitted information concerning
cases of alleged summary execution in the Philippines, I have the honour
to submit IIe enclosed additional information concerning the following
persons:
1. Danilo Deldoc
2. Jose de la Cruz
3. Perlita de la Cruz . :
4. Elvie Degit . :
5. Leonardo Tagapan
6. Arcelos Babion
7. Julian Boname
8. Marcelina l3oname
9. Henrieta Boname
10. Daniel Boname
11. Carlito Boname
12. Jojie Paduano
13 Janilyn Enriquez
14 orlando Viernes
15 Rolando Viernes
16. Marieta Viernes
17. Ernesto Pijeda
18. Group of squatter families in Davao.
It would be appreciated if the information herewith submitted could
be reflected in the report of Mr. S.A. Amos Wako, Special Rapporteur.
Information provided by the Philippine Govenment in reply to a request .
from Mr. S.A. Amos Wako, Special Rapporteur.
A. Danilo Deldoc, Jose de la Cruz, Perlita de la Cnn .
According to the report from IIe Neuva Ecija c provincial
Commander, Jose de la Cruz and Perlita de la Cruz were killed during an
ambush conducted by subversive terrorists at Barangay Atate, palayan CttY
on 7 June 1984 while coming from re—enactment of ST/NPA (New Peoples : .
Army) conducted by Jose de la Cruz and his men on CHDF detachment by
Barangay A.ntipolo, Bongabon, Mueva Ecija. The report also stated that a
. ;
1.4: ;
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 77
a church in bavao
17 January 1986
[ Original , English]
of
of
certain Danilo Deldoc, an ST messenger captured with the de Ia Cruz
couple escaped during the ambush which resulted in damage to a military
vehicle and injuries to military personnel.
B. Elvie Degit, Leonardo Tagapan, ArceloS Babion, Juli and
Marcelina Boname, Henrieta, Daniel and Carlito Boname,
Orlando Viernes, Rolando and Marieta Viernes, ErnestoPijeda,
Janilyn Enriques, Jojie Paduano and a group of squatter families ii z
Regional unified commands 6, 8, 10 and 11 had been directed to
investigate and submit reports on the alleged killing of the above—named
ake some time due to the
insufficient data presented with which to start a meani'i iir
investigation. Nevertheless, IIe Philippine Government will make efforts
to look into these cases.
In this connection, it is recommended that, for future inquiries on
alleged human rights violations, the Philippine Government should be
provided with the following minimum data: (1) full name and residence
victim, (2) date and specific place of incident and (3) circumstances
: behind the incident.”
In addition, the Special Rapporteur met the representative from the Embassy
the Philippines who further elaborated on the foregoing answers.
Cc) .
. , , . . I I
In response to your request made in IIe course of our discussion
yesterday, I am pleased to furnish you with a copy of a document entitled
‘General information on IIe insurgency situation in the Philippines and
its impact on human rights'. 2/ I trust that this information will
provide you with an accurate understanding of the situation in the
Philippines in connection with your consideration of reports of alleged
summary or arbitrary executions
: ‘ ,
“, < [ ‘
I
, 3! Available for consultation in the secretariat files.
“
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 78
135. OEe Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
in regard to South Africa, which reads as follows:
“During the past several months, hundreds of persons were reportedly
killed in the course of various demonstrations, largely as a result of
mob violence and police intervention, in some cases, in indiscriminatory
shootings. Although figures for deaths vary according to sources, it
would appear that several hundred persons were killed. . Between 1 January
and 20 April 1985 some 123 persons were said by the Minister of Law and
Order to have been killed in the East Cape alone.
The following data are illustrative of these killings:
1. On 21 March 1985 19 or possibly as many as 43 persons were shot
. . . .
2. On 14 April 1985, seven persons were killed by police in Zwide
township near Port Elizabeth.
In addition, community leaders died in unclear circumstances in
which the police were directly or indirectly concerned. For example:
1. On 22 January 1985, william Kratshi was shot dead by police in
Beaufort—West,
2. In May 1985, Andries Raditsela, a black union leader died
shortly after he was released from police detention allegedly :
as a result of head injuries caused while in detention. :
Also in May 1985 a person, whose name was given as Sipho Mutsi,
allegedly died in police custody in Odendaalsrug in IIe Orange Free State :‘
as a result of ill—treatment by the police. .
As this summary is prepared, reports of indiscriminate loss of life . :
due to police intervention and mob violence continued to be received.”
136. On 5 November 1985, the Permanent Representative of South Africa to the
United Nations Office at Geneva visited the Special Rappor-teur concerning the
above—mentioned allegations.
137. The following letters, dated 8 and 30 January 1986, addressed to the
Assistant Secretary—General for Human Rights, was received from the •
Permanent Mission of South Africa to the United Nations Office at Geneva:
(a) 8 January 1986
(Original: English) :
“You will recall that during our meeting on 23 December 1985, t left
with you an aide—mSoire, relating to the placing of land—mines near the: ?
northern borders of the Transvaal by members of the African National
Congress which resulted in the deaths of five people, including two
children.
Subsequent to this meeting two further incidents occurred. On
Monday, 23 December, a bomb exploded at the holiday resort of ;
Amanzimtoti, Natal, resulting in the deaths of two adults and three
children, and in ]ur lng another 54, while a land—mine exploded near
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 79
Ellisrason the border between South Africa and Botswana on
4 January 1986, killing two persons and seriously injuring two others.
Both these incidents have been attributed to the African National
Congress, which, although not admitting responsibility for either, has
nevertheless not categorically denied it. Consequently, while not making
specific allegations against ANC in respect to these two outrages' at
this stage, it must be pointed out that the terrorist acts, to which
reference was made during our discussions, create precedents; IIeir
authors cannot evade a moral responsibility for those who follow their
example.
_InShe.Ji. ht o tjh o eg pingIhave be en asked to advise you that
the contents of the aide-m&noire represent the official views of the
South African authorities and should be treated accordingly.
PJDE-MEMOIRE ,
During the early evening of Sunday, 15 December 1985 at
: approximately 7.p.m. a small delivery truck carrying two families
detonated a land—mine in the vicinity of Messina. Six persons, of whom
four were child ren, were injured. This serious incident follows a series
of similar land—mine explosions in the same region on 27 and 28 November
and 15 December 1985 in the course of which there were several other
. , . , , fatalities. It has not yet been established whether the latest land—mine
:‘ explosion constitutes an incident arising from the original placing of
land—mines on South African territory or whether it has resulted from a
device placed more recently. This aspect is being investigated but,
whatever the position, the South African Government is gravely concerned
at the continuing violence and terror which it is believed is being or
was planned in and executed from Zimbabwean territory.
The South African Government has been in contact with the Zimbabwean
4 authorities and is encouraged to note that they, too, have indicated
‘their own concern for the gravity of the issue Discussions have
accordingly been initiated at service level to find a practical formula
II ensure that Zimbabwean territory is not used as a springboard for
;t violent action against any neighbouring country.
The South African Government has exercised great restraint in the
nu.dst of these tragic events. It has, however, a responsibility to
defentj its territory and secure the safety of its citizens at all times
and has accordingly not only the right but IIe duty to take appropriate
action to prevent any further acts of terrorism emanating from Zimbabwean
‘territory and to protect its borders against incursion.
, ,
The incidents are presumably of concern both to the Centre and the
COfltfltission on Human Rights. Both emphasize the principle of the right to
lif The Special Rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions pointed
i t t his report to the forty—first session of the Commission on Human
(E/CN.4/l985/l7) that while Governments bear the primary
: Ponsibi1ity this does not exonerate groups other than Governments
the right to life.
Moreover, the General Assembly on 18 December 1985 unequivocally and
condemned all acts of terrorism irrespective of the motives.
!
r
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 80
The African National Congress has confirmed IIat its members planted
the land—mines. This organization enjoys official observer status in,
and attends meetings of, the Commission on Human Rights, where it has so
far been exempt from criticism, despite similar acts in the past. It is
assumed that the Commission will take cognizance of these facts when it
meets in February and exercise its consequential responsibilities.”
On 15 January 1986, the Permanent Representative of South Africa to the
United Nations Office at Geneva met the Special Rapporteur concerning the
above—mentioned allegations.
(b) 30 January 1986
“In his letter G/5O 214 (33—3) of 12 July 19 W
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on summary or
arbitrary executions, drew the attention of Member States to the
indications he had received that in some cases the safeguards usually
envisaged to protect the right to life did not seem to function
adequately. In this regard he referred in particular to article 6,
paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
With specific reference to South Africa, the Special Rapporteur
submitted certain allegations, which he felt related to the above
paragraph of the Covenant, to the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law
Enforcement Officials as well as to the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In so far as
the latter instrument is concerned, a communication was addressed to you
on 2 January 1986 in answer to an inquiry from the Special Rapporteur On
torture.
The Centre for Human Rights has also been provided with the report
of Mr. Justice lcannemeyer into the incident which occurred on
21 March 1985 at Uitenhage, to which the Special Rapporteur makes special
reference. This Commission of Inquiry, set up by the South African
Government, investigated the events which took place at Langa Township on
that date. The report was tabled in the House of Assembly on
13 June 1985 and was the subject of an extensive debate during which the
Minister of Law and Order made the following statement .
‘Mr. Justice lannemeyer's report relating to the events in
Langa, Uitenhage, on 21 March is of very great importance to the
Government. I should again like to thank Mr. Justice Kannemeyer for
the thorough, expeditious and irreproachable manner in which he
carried out his terms of reference. His report is clear and
descriptive.
OEe memorandum tabled in conjunction with the report was draWn
up as factually and correctly as possible and contains a summary of
the foremost matters dealt with in the report, including the
findings based on those matters. What is more, the Government
standpoint in regard to a few important aspects are also clearly set
out, these being: firstly, that the procedure in connection with
the application prohibiting funerals would be reviewed, secondlY'
that, in addition to what has already been done, the South Africa
Police manpower, equipment and training needs — to enable them to
carry out riot control more efficiently, but with the least poSS 3 --
danger to themselves and the public — would continually be
E/CN.4/l986/2l
page 81
reviewed; and thirdly, that a board of inquiry has been appointed
in ternis of the Police Act to consider matters in connection with
certain of the commission's findings relating to the Police.
The report is therefore receiving the necessary attention that
it deserves, and in essence it is acceptable to the Government.'
The report may IIerefore be treated by the Commission as having
official sanction.
At the conclusion of his speech the Minister stated:
‘The Government wishes to reaffirm its acceptance of the
ppjhjljty orsategnarding ttK al1.. the means. t it&disp .osaL. , ,_
all the peoples of South African in their right to live, work and
partake in cultural and political activity without fear for the
safety of their persons, their families and their properties.
Leaders and organizations engaged in attempts at the destabilization
of South Africa, have by word and deed embarked on a path of
lawlessness through mob action and individual attacks on persons and
property. People, especially Black civic leaders, have been
mutilated and killed and property worth millions destroyed. It is
mainly the South African Police Force that has to bear the brunt.
In the performance of their duties, sometimes in small numbers, they
are exposed to great dangers. The Government and South Africa owe
them gratitude and appreciation. To bring unrest to an end and to
maintain the peace needed for political, social and economic
development is our common aim and task.'
The Special Rapporteur will appreciate the relevance of these
remarks in the light of the comments in his report to the Commission on
Human Rights at its forty—first session (E/CN.4/1985/l7, paras.75 and
76). This particular issue was also raised in my letter to you of
2 January 1986 concerning inter alia the laying of land—mines by
followers of the African National Congress. The South African Government
is' determined to carry out its obligations to protect its citizens from
attacks of this nature, a duty clearly recognized by IIe
. . ‘ , ‘ Special Rapporteur, and assumes that its acceptance of that obligation
. , , , , . , , , will be accompanied by the unqualified support of the Commission on Human
Rights in terms of Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40,
paragraph 2
OEe Special Rapporteur also referred to the death of
Mr. dries paditsela. In this regard I am instructed to advise you that
Mr. Raditsela was arrested on 4 May 1985 in terms of article 50 of the
Criminal Procedure Act of 1977, not in terms of security legislation He
. JUmped out of a moving vehicle in which he was being transported to the
Police station and suffered head injuries in his fall. He died in
hospitaj. two days later. The police docket investigating the incident
as been referred to the Attorney—General, Johannesburg, to the competent
judicial authorities and a hearing is currently in progress.
In the final paragraph of the annex to his letter the
Special Rapporteur writes: ‘As this summary is prepared, reports of
4j Lndiscriminate loss of life due to police intervention and mob violence
Ofl flue to be received.' There is little doubt that the
Sal': Rapporteur will receive further allegations particularly in
gard 0 the former Bearing in mind, therefore, some of the points
raised earlier in this letter regarding IIe obligations of a State to
counter activity by non—governmental groups which fail to respect the
right to life, I would inform you that the whole question of security
legislation was submitted to a Commission of Inquiry in 1981/82 under the
chairmanship of Mr. Justice Rabie. After examining a vast amount of
evidence, the Commission came, inter alia , to the conclusion that,
considering the factual situation which had been outlined to it and in
particular the terrorist acts and sabotage committed in South Africa
during the previous couple of years ; IIe likelihood that these
: activities would increase in the foreseeable future; the fact that they
were planned and executed by supporters of organizations which aimed at
the violent overthrow of the existing order in South Africa, that they
p were supported and aided by communist countries towards achieving their
objective ,—and—that•---the j -r-actj-v jt jes--coria—brcarri-e-doeutfflaII
bordering on South Africa, there was no doubt about the necessity for
, ,. security legislation, including detention for the purposes of
interrogation currently enshrined in article 29 of the Internal Security
. : .T Act of 1982.
The Commission pointed out that such detention is a drastic measure
‘ . ‘ , ‘ ! which should only be retained for compelling reasons. It found that
, f: information obtained from persons in detention was the major and, to a
great extent, the only weapon available to the police to anticipate and
H counter terrorism and other undermining activities.
The views of the Commission were accepted by the Government and
incorporated into IIe Internal Security Act of 1982 together with its
recommendations for the protection of detainees. For convenience sake
the effect of this legislation and consequential regulations is
summarized below:
Arrests and detentions in terms of security legislation are related
to the crimes of terrorism or sabotage. Each arrest must be notified as
soon as possible to the Commissioner of Police, who in turn advises the
Minister of Law and Order. No detention may exceed 30 days without the
written authority of the Minister who must be furnished with reasons once
a month why a person held should not be released. In addition, all
detentions are subject to a Board of Review should IIey exceed six
months, and every quarter thereafter.
OEere are various provisions contained in the Internal Security Act
which relate to the welfare of detainees and the prevention of torture.
In terms of the Act an Inspector of Detainees is appointed who must visit
persons detained under section 29 regularly in order to safeguard their
physical and mental well—being, while Magistrates and District Surgeons
in whose area of jurisdiction a detainee is held must visit him(her) at
least every two weeks. All interviews conducted with the detainee during
such visits are in private: should a detainee allege torture or
ill—treatment during the interview, special channels have been create&
for the Minister of Law and Order and the local Attorney-General to be
informed immediately.
Apart from the provisions of the Internal Security Act itself,
special orders also exist within the South African Police Force making i
obligatory to open a file on any complaint involving mistreatment made by
a detainee against any member of the Force. The file is registered and
referred for investigation to another section of the Force not invol
in the detention. After the completion of the investigation the file
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 82
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 83
must be forwarded to the local Attorney-General, who must decide on
whether it contains sufficient prima facie evidence to justify
prosecution.
Neither IIe Inspector of Detainees nor any Magistrate or
Surgeon—General account to the Police for the actions they may take. The
special Rapporteur is doubtless aware that prosecutions have been
instituted in the past as a result of such investigations. Some as
stated earlier in this letter, are currertly before the competent
division of the Supreme Court.
In addition to the standing instruction strictly forbidding
maltreatment of detainees the Commissioner of Police has issued special
ckt&n g !ki le IIe Mi nister of L aw and Orde r ..
has published a series of regulations in the G e* SIIrE Gazette which are
therefore open to public inspection and which are regularly brought to
the attention of investigating officials.
J; Any detainee also has the right while still in detention and after
release, to initiate civil or criminal proceedings against anyone they
:clajfl has assaulted or maltreated them.
It is not possible to supply final comments on all the specific
2 tances raised by the Special Rapporteur, since in respect of some of
legal proceedings are under way, thus bringing the sub judice rule
operation.” .
Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
ar&to Sri Lanka, which reads as follows:
J;t “As in recent years in the context of civil strife, several
F Y- ns belonging to a particular minority ethnic group were killed by
}.ty forces, it was alleged that these killings were often carried
in . retaliation for the killings of members of the armed forces,
19: ice and civilians by armed groups. According to one account, between
9 St 1984 to February 1985 the number of persons reported to have been
security forces personnel amounted to 225. Such killings took
mainly in the northern part of Sri Lanka, in particular, Mannar
OEe Prisons DeparIIent too takes pride in the professional behaviour
of its officers and in their adherence to strict regulations which assure
the well—being of all prisoners and detainees
All detainees are medically examined upon arrival;
Upon arrival and on a daily basis thereafter detainees and prisoners
are given the opportunity to raise any complaint or request; these
are noted in a register,
Judges of the Supreme Court, specially released for the purpose,
visit detainees on a regular basis during which the detainee has the
opportunity to raise any complaint of torture or ill—treatment.
Judges who perform this duty do not only report the complaints and
needs of the detainees but also evaluate the conditions of IIeir
detention;
Members of Parliament also visit detainees from time to time.
—‘
E/CN .4/1986/21
(August and December 1984, January 1985), Point Pedro (September 1984),
Vavuniya (September 1984), Othiyamalai (December 1984), Vankalai
(January 1985), Velvettiturai (May 1985), as a result of an attack on a
ferry from the island of Deift (May 1985) and Anuradhapura (May 1985).
It was also alleged that on 3 December 1984, 32 persons, after
having been arrested on suspicion of involvement in armed opposition,
were shot dead at the Vavuniya army camp. -
According to other sources, several persons were reported to have
been killed by guerrilla groups on different occasions in the same
context. For example 86 persons were reported to have been killed on
14 May 1985 in Anuradhapura by one guerrilla group.”
139. The following replies, dated 5 November and 27 December 1985, were
received from the Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office
(Original: English]
“I have the honour to refer to your letter of 12 July 1985 and to
convey to you the following information from the Government of Sri Lanka
concerning the matters referred to in your letter.
1. The Government of Sri Lanka denies the allegation made that, in IIe
context of civil strife, civilians belonging to a particular minority
group were killed by members of the security forces. Some civilians have
died as a result of terrorists deliberately carrying out armed attacks on
security forces in crowded areas thereby exposing civilians to the risk
of death in the cross—fire. However, the loss of civilian lives in these
incidents has not been confined to one particular ethnic group.
4. As regards the incident referred to at Vavuniya in September 1984,
investigations conducted reveal that a private bus bearing No.30 Sri 25
belonging to ‘VIP Express' left Colombo on 11 June 1984 around 8 p.m.
with 44 passengers and two drivers bound for Jaffna. At Rambawewa, 411
armed gang hijacked the bus and ordered the driver to drive off the mfln
road where the gang then gunned down 14 passengers and robbed them of
their belongings . Several injured passengers were admitted to the
Vavuniya hospital and later transferred to the Anuradhapura and
Kurunegala hospitals. Subsequently, two persons died of their wounds.
2. Regarding allegations against the Army concerning incidents supposed
to have taken place in August 1984 in Mannar, it has been reported that
on 11 August 1984, six soldiers in an armed convoy were killed due to an
explosion caused by terrorists. Consequent to this incident there has
been tension in the area, which is at present subject to an investigation
by IIe competent authorities in Sri Lanka
3. As regards the incident that took place in September at Point Pedro,
on 1 september a convoy belonging to the Special Task Force proceeding
towards Point Pedro hit a land—mine killing four police officers. The
terrorists who had laid the ambush then fired at the police party, which
returned the fire. As a result some civilians in the vicinity were
killed by the cross—fire.
page 84
at Geneva.
(a) 5 November 1985
—
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 85
Statements were made by several persons who received gunshot injuries and
several others, who had escaped the assailants at IIe time of the
tragedy, were questioned. According to the investigations, it was
established that service or police personnel were not involved in the
incident, but a gang had committed this crime wiII robbery as the motive.
5. Regarding the incident alleged to have taken place at OIIiyamalai in
December 1984, the following narrates the sequence of events as they
transpired. On 30 November 1984, Tamil terrorists launched an attack on
the Dollar and Kent Farm killing around 60 civilians, including women and
children, in a very gruesome manner. Due to this incident there had been
tension in the area which resulted in some Sinhalese retaliating by way
‘— —‘—of—attackirig—Tamil_settlers on_2_MoY euIIar_k9?4. A 27 villagers were
reported killed as a result of this incident.
6. At Vankalai in January 1985, Rev. Fr. Mary Bastian was found dead
and investigations conducted by the competent authorities revealed that
he was not killed by the security forces.
7. On 14 May 1985, a group of Tamil terrorists travelled in a bus
disguised as military personnel to Anuradhapura. OEey fired at the
public at the Anuradhapura bus—stand, killing and injuring many there,
later they proceeded to the ‘Sri MaFia Bodiya' — a sacred shrine, hallowed
by Buddhists throughout the world and fired at worshipping devotees.
OEey IIen proceeded towards Puttalam, opening fire at Nochchiyagama
police station and then proceeded to Wfipatu Game Sanctuary and opened
fire killing 23 wild Life Department employees. In these incidents 144
were killed including 25 women and 6 children and over 60 were injured
The murder of innocent people in Anuradhapura resulted in tension in
the area causing the Government to give priority to the safety of Tamils
residing in Anuradhapura by shifting then to a safer location While
they were being shifted an emotionally distressed corporal grabbed the
gun of a fellow soldier and began firing at evacuees, he was ordered to
‘ stop firing by the Commanding Officer who ultimately shot him dead when
he failed to do so. Six Tamils died in this incident.
8. As regards the allegations made of 32 persons being shot in a
Vavuniya Army Camp in December 1985, the following explains the position.
On 2 December, 39 suspects, who were detained at Vavuniya Army Camp
:.. .! z e killed when the camp was attacked by terrorists. tn this context, a
1 judicial inquest has been held in the Nigh Court and the High Court Judge
H. as held that the persons concerned came by their deaths as a result of
. being caught in the cross—fire when the camp was attacked by terrorists
. on the night of 2 December 1985. This refers to High Court
Inquest No. 31/85. 2/
‘ 9 I would like to take this opportunity to draw your kina attention to
,, a few examples of indiscriminate killings by terrorist groups of innocent
4 vilzans belonging to Sinhala, Muslim and Tamil communities within the
C last 12 months.
: :
Available for consultation in the secretariat file
E/CN.4/1986/21
page 86
(a) Between 6 November and 6 December 1984, 156 were killed
including those attacked at Kokila and Nayaru fishing villages and Kent
and Dollar Farms;
(b) At Anuradhapura in May 1985, 144 were killed;
(c) During the first three months of cessation of hostilities
between 18 June and 18 September 1985, 168 civilians were killed by the
terrorists. -
10. OEe Government of Sri Lanka in the meantime has taken several
measures to promote the observance of human rights in the context of the
special situation created within the country as a result of the terrorist
activities launched with the ultimate goal of establishing a separate ____
ttat .
In June 1985, an Organization for Human Rights Promotion through
Law Enforcement Agencies was formally inaugurated under the patronage of
H.E. the President of Sri Lanka. OEe Vice Patrons are
Hon. Prime Minister, Hon. Chief Justice and Hon. Leader of the Opposition.
OEe objects of the Organization are:—
(a) To take steps to promote and co—ordinate the work of law
enforcement officials and agencies in their recognition of and respect
for human rights as accepted and formulated by the community of nations
(b) To study and formulate the principles, practices, procedures
and prerequisites for the observance of human rights in the -performance
of law enforcement functions in Sri Lanka;
(c) To assist in formulating policies and codes of conduct, which
through co—ordination and integration would advance the administration of
justice in general and the observance of human rights in particular; - - -
(d) To encourage every law enforcement official and agency to
observe the duty of disciplining themselves in conformity with the
principles and standards as formulated in IIe Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, fundamental rights as embodied in the Constitution and laws
of Sri Lanka and such other human rights instruments as may be ratified
by the Government of Sri Lanka;
(e) To take all necessary steps, including the holding of seminars,
conferences and exhibitions, the preparation and dissemination of
literature and information, for the furtherance of the above objects.
A Committee to monitor the cessation of hostilities was also :
appointed in October 1985.
OEe Committee consists of three retired Supreme Court Judges and
several other renowned public servants of all IIree major communities
This also includes the Principal of Hindu College, Trincomalee and a
professor of Jaffna University.
The Committee will investigate and report on violations of the
cease—f ire, assist authorities in IIe resettlement of displaced psrsonst-
‘-
E/CN.4/1986/23.
page 87
facilitate meetings between detainees under Provisional Terrorism Act
(PTA) and their relatives, visit detention camps when the Committee deems
necessary and initiate investigations on any material which may come to
its attention.”
(b) 27 December 1985 .
(Originals English]
“High Court Inquest No.31/85 held in Sri Laffc&
Further to paragraph 8 of my letter dated 5 November 1985 and the
subsequent discussion with the First Secretary of this Mission on the
proceedings of High Court In quest I have the honour ,t fp,cwar&herawi-th-
he High Court Inquest No.31/85 3/ which you have requested.
. I trust that IIe details contained therein will be helpful to you in
“ arriving at an objective evaluation wiII regard to the situation in
. Sri Lanka.”
.140. OEe Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at
: Geneva met the Special Rapporteur on 16 January 1986 and briefed the
Special Rapporteur on the general situation in Sri Lanka. He stated that the
Government of Sri Lanka was interested in a peaceful solution to the “Tamil
problem”. The Government had made proposals in June 1985 and had also
received proposals made by the Tanil United Liberation Front. flowever, the
: , militants had not made any proposals and continued with their violence. The
total number of civilians murdered as a result was given as 885 and the total
, mnnb of security forces killed was given as 194. The Committee for the
Monitoring of the Cessation of Hostilities had continued to operate although
be alleged that the cease—fire had been violated repeatedly by the extremist
militants
141 In addition, the Special Rapporteur received information materials, press
releases, newspaper articles etc., from the Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka to
the United Nations Office at Geneva concerning the situation in Sri Lanka.
142: The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of the allegations received
irrregara to Uganda, which reads as follows
“A large number of civilians were allegedly killed by the army in
the West Nile and Buganda regions The victims were alleged to be
SUpporters of the opposition party or members of certain ethnic groups.
Accoraing to sources, at least 100,000 people were estimated to have been
t T ; i1led since 1981 The following are some examples illustrative of these
l Jegations;
West Nile
In June 1984 civilians were killed by soldiers in a market—place in
igbo in retaliation for a guerrilla attack on Rhino Army Camp;
In October 1984 more than 40 civilians were killed by soldiers near
tJCUlikulinya, Udravu, Aringa County, in retaliation for a guerrilla attack
Available for consultation in IIe secretariat file
E/CN. 4/1996/21
page 88
Buganda
In May 1984 up to 100 civilians were killed by soldiers in Namugorigo
during a military operation to search for guerrillas. It was also
alleged that some of those killed were dumped into mass graves in the
vicinity of army barracks. It was said that numerous mass graves were
found in the Luwero triangle and the outskirts of Kampala, for example,
Bombo, at Kaaya's farm in Buruli County and in Namanve Forest. In
H June 1985 in an incident in Kasangati, four persons whose names were
given as Bazirio Mukasa, Francis Kiwe, Lazaro Ntabyera and Henry Nnunda
: were allegedly shot by soldiers from Nakindye Military Barracks near
Kampala and buried in a mass grave. Lazaro Ntabyera, one of the four,
was alleged to be still alive when he was buried.
OE addition to these, a nuuter of deaths in prison were alleged to
have occurred as a result of torture, deprivation of prisoners of
adequate food and water, extremely inferior prison conditions and absence
of medical attention.
With regard to alleged killing of members and supporters of the
H opposition party, one such victim was given as Sebastian Ssebuggwawo, an
opposition neuter of the Parliament, who was allegedly abducted in
May 1985 and found dead outside Kampala.”
143. No reply has been received from the Government of Uganda.
144. The Special Rapporteur transmitted a summary of IIe allegations received . ..
in regard to Zaire which reads as follows:
“Killing of detainees by IIe security forces was alleged to have
continued in 1984. In Kinshasa killing of prisoners allegedly took place
in October 1984 at the Deuxiame cit6 de l'orJA. In February 1984 in
‘ : U Bukavu, Kivu region, a number of persons, unemployed young men, were
allegedly executed at the Agence Nationale de Documentation (AND)
: U headquarters after having been arrested for suspected possession of . . : ‘ . ‘ . .
firearms.
Killing of villagers by soldiers was also alleged to have occurred
during the course of military operations in late 1984 near the eastern ‘ :
border of Zaire, in particular in two villages north of Urina in Kivu
region — Luberiza and Sange — and in Moba, Bendera and Kalemie in
North—eastern Shaba.”
145. No reply has been received from the Government of Zaire.
III. ACUTE PHENOMENA REQUIRING PARTICULAR ATTENTION
E/Ct .4/1986/21
page 89
146. In the preceding chapter the information received by the
Special Rapporteur is set out, including the various replies relating to it.
OEe special Rapporteur thus attempts to give an impression of the overall
picture put before him. From the foregoing, it is evident that summary or
bitrary executions took place in various situations in various countries
with different political, social and cultural backgrounds. It is always risky
to generalize and characterize those situations according to categories.
147. However distinct similarities in the basic factors of certain situations
are noticeable. In his previous reports the Special Rapporteur tried to
categorize those situations where summary or arbitrary executions were
reported to have taken place, in order to elucidate the common features in
chap. III).
149. OEe typical situations in which arbitrary and summary executions occur
continue to correspond to those which have been mentioned by the
Special Rapporteur in previous reports. In the present report three
particular types of situation emerge of which it may be stated that the
non—respect of the right to life is a major consequence. OEey are:
agents,
(c) Deaths in custody.
149. These situations reflect acute phenomena which are further explained
below.
A. Killings in situations of internal armed conflict
150. s the Special Rapporteur has stated in all his previous reports, a very
nigh proportion of siiw n.ary or arbitrary executions occur in situations of
armed conflicts. Human life is often increasingly threatened during times of
SUon internal conflict when law enforcement or security agencies are wont to
4tJ.lize lethal force in an indiscriminate manner. During the year under
review, a large number of lives were lost in internal armed conflicts in
venous part of the world. In such conflicts both the members of government
: 0 es and armed opposition groups were killed during armed encounters or
combat 5 . However, killings usually did not stop there. As the situation of
0 nflict deteriorated, incidents of indiscriminate killing of civilian
non_combatants, including women and children, by both government forces and
PPOSitio groups increased, in particular, in the areas where guerrillas were
L Ive
51.• . . . .
. ndiscri nate killings were also attributed to opposition groups in a
er of cases. Killing of government troops induced retaliation by
_tnTaent forces. Victims were often civilians who were members of certain
-‘li.c,. religious or social groups suspected of supporting opposition groups.
Killings by the opposition groups also reflected similar patterns.
‘ewere killed for being suspected of co—operating with the Government, or
- members of a dominant ethnic, religious or social group which
the Government. In this case again victims were often innocent
(a) Killings in situations of internal armed conflict;
II) Killings by excessive or illegal use of force by law enforcement
r
E/Ct q.4/19a6/ l
page 90
civilians. Retaliation from one side called for retaliation from the other
side and so the situation escalated. In some instances entire village
populations were victimized, the evidence being mass graves at roadsides or
dumping sites, often with signs of the bodies having been tortured. In a
number of cases it was officially announced IIat those victims had actually
been guerrillas, that they had been victims of guerrilla operations, or that
deaths had occurred in armed clashes between government and guerrilla forces.
Opposition groups on the other hand claimed that such persons were summarily
executed by government troops, often after they had been taken into custody
and tortured.
153. In the following paragraphs a number of situations are described to
illustrate this phenomenon.
of civfiians were IIe victims of indiscriminate killing in
the armed conflict in Afghanistan between government troops and foreign forces
H on IIe one side and opposition movements on IIe other. In this connection
‘.T reference may be made to the reports by the Special Rapporteur of the
: ‘ Commission on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan
, (E/CN.4/1985/2l and E/CN.4/l986/24).
155. Indiscriminate killing of civilians and captured combatants occurred in
., . , ‘ ] Chad in the armed conflict between the armed forces of the new Government and
‘ : those loyal to the former President. Killings by government forces allegedly
took place in reprisal for armed attacks upon government forces or officials.
156. A large number of deaths were reported among civilians, mostly peasants,
in the internal armed conflict in El Salvador between government forces and
armed opposition groups. Apart from the deaths and disappearances attributed
to government forces, both paramilitary organizations and guerrilla forces
were alleged to have committed political killings of non—combatant civilians.
In this connection reference may be made to the reports of the
Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights on the situation of
human rights in El Salvador CE/CN.4/l502, E/CN.4/l983/20, E/CN.4/1984/25,
E/CN.4/l985/].8 and E/CN.4/l986/22).
157. Indiscriminate killing of villagers by the armed forces was alleged in
Guatemala in the areas where guerrillas were said to be active. In a number
of cases, the Government explained that many victims had died in
confrontations between the security forces and guerrilla groups or had been
killed or had disappeared as a result of actions carried out by armed
opposition groups. Apart from counter—insurgency campaigns, persons regarded
as opponents of the Government were assassinated by so—called “death squads”.
In 1982 a state of siege was declared and a Special Military Tribunal was
established. OEe Special Military Tribunal was empowered to impose the death
penalty for a wide range of security off ences after proceedings which did not
fully guarantee the rights of the accused. OEe Special Military Tribunals
were abolished in August 1983. Reference may be made to the reports of the
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Luman Rights on the situation of hulitan
rights in Guatemala (E/CN.4/1984/30, E/CN.4/1985/l9 and E/CN.4/l986/23).
158. By way of further example, it may be noted that the non—combatant
civilians have been killed by armed forces personnel, civilian militias and
irregular paramilitary groups in the Philippines, often in the areas where
armed opposition groups were active. A number of those killings allegedlY
t/CN. ./1986/2l
page 91
took place after the victims were taken into custody by the security forces or
abducted by un dentif led groups. Killing of unarmed civilians by the
0 05 ition groups was also reported.
i59. A niiiiIIer of persons belonging to an ethnic minority group were killed II
Sri Lanka during incidents of communal violence. Killings of members of
security forces by the armed opposition group allegedly resulted in the deaths
of unarmed civilians belonging to the ethnic minority in retaliation and in
several cases entire villages were reportedly victimized. According to the
figures given by the Government of Sri Lanka, in 1985, a total of
985 civilians were murdered by the militant terrorists and 194 members of the
security forces were killed.
160 In f t c report the Special Rapporteur poui ed bht tnatrunder—article 4,
ragraph 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
jierogation from article 6, which provides for the right to life, is not
‘permitted in times of public emergency. The Protocols additional to the
Geneva Conventions have provisions which protect the i ji lt to life of
civilians in situations of internal armed conflict, internal disturbances and
tensions. However, in these situations, neither international standards nor
national laws and regulations, that are in conformity with international
standards designed to restrain the acts of members of the security forces, are
adhered to.
161. The existence of internal armed conflict invariably presupposes the
uspension or non—applicability of certain legal safeguards by the formal
. declaration of a state of siege, a state of emergency or an equinlent
exceptional legal r gime. A number of constitutional safeguards to protect
certain human rights, in particular the right to liberty and security of
jerson, are suspended or severely curtailed, sometimes to the ectent that in
: effect any guarantee is precluded.
162 In a number of such situations a de facto emergency existed, although in
OEe absence of a formal declaration of a state of emergency or other form of
)usPenslon. The extensive powers ehercised by the executive and/or the
tkilitary authorities rendered inoperative the substantive part of the
constitutional guarantees, and laws concerning security matters were
Promulgated y decree.
163. The most common features of emergency situations are the wide powers
given to the security forces to airest peisons without a warrant and to detain
Persons for prolonged pe: ods without charge, and the absence of judicial
0 ntrol over the legality of such arrests and detentsofl
In such situations a Large number of people dtsappeared The autiortties
Often refused to acknowledge the arrests and detention. In a number of cases
r h persons were later found dead. In some cases members of security forces
. . .
ven1me offlcialc were abducted and icalled by opposition groups
It iS extremely difficult even for an insider to establish responsibility
YJ tllings in situations of internal conflicts , Governments put the blame
,e terro j or cruerrilla groups which in turn put the blame on
ninent forces. The issues can also be clouded when 2 or propaganda
Ses either side engages in a process of disinformation with a view to
ing a black and negative picture of the other side. As many killings are
jnYhbongovernmental groups as by government agencies. In fact some of
E/CN.4/1986/2l
page 92
those groups are committed to violence even in countries which are on the
whole democratic in nature and therefore offer an avenue f6r such groups to be
heard and an opportunity to effect change peacefully.
166. It must however be emphasized that under national and international law,
the primary responsibility for ensuring respect for the right to life rests
with the State. However, these non—governmental groups must also respect the
right to life and inasmuch as they engage in any killings, they must be
condemned. As the Security Council stated in the historic resolution it
adopted on 18 December 1985, all acts of terrorism must be resolutely
: [ condemned.
167. It is the Government's responsibility to remove the causes which make
such .groups take up .arms. ...In.. IIe SpeciaLJRapporteutLs pre .vious reports—such
causes have been identified as inequitable distribution of wealth, ethnic
conflicts, religious intolerance and racial discrimination. The
Special Rapporteur is pleased to note that, according to the information in
, p' - ‘ his possession, some Governments are at least trying to remove these
underlying causes.
168. For example, the Government of Brazil stated in its reply to the
Special Rapporteur that it had decided to tackle the problems of landownership
and use with a view to eliminating situations in which tensions arise leading
to acts of violence. The Governments of Colombia and Peru are taking into
account in their policies the economic and social causes of the situation in
their countries.
169. In internal conflicts the polarization of the various groups in society
takes place and therefore one of the ways of removing the polarization is for
the Government to embark on a genuine and deliberate policy of national
reconciliation. Colombia and Peru have embarked on such a process. Peru for
example has established a Peace Commission which is an advisory and
consultative body of the Office of the President and which has amongst its
functions the opening up of dialogue with a view of persuading those who
resort to violence and terrorism to return to democracy and the life of the
social community in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of the
Republic.
170. As the Special Rapporteur has stated in the past, where summary or
arbitrary execution has occurred in these situations, Governments have not
normally investigated the matter or charged the offenders before the courts.
This is now beginning to happen. For example, the Peace Commission
established in Pen has among its functions to channel and bring before the
authorities such complaints as may be submitted regarding human rights
violations involving killings and extra—judicial executions. OEe Government
of Pen has replaced the Chief of Joint Command of the Armed Forces and
relieved a major—general and a brigadier—general of their duties as their
junior officers were responsible for killings. It can be seen from the reply
of the Government of Colombia that investigations have been launched into a
number of allegations which have been brought to its attention. This is the
type of co—operation that the Special Rapporteur appreciates.
171. At the international level, there are developments which are worth
noting. It is therefore to be welcomed that, following the study prepared by
Mrs. N. Questiaux on the question of human rights during states of siege or
emergency, the Sub—Commission at its thirty—eighth session examined an
explanatory paper from its Special Rapporteur, Mr. L. Despouy, on the best WC
of drawing up and updating an annual list of countries which have procla '
, , ‘
E/CW.4/1986/2l
page 93
o r terminated a state of emergency. The Sub—Commission has requested its
special Rapporteur to present his first annual report and to draw up an
jtial list for submission to the Sub—Commission at its thirty-ninth session.
172. The application of international standards on human rights during
g ergency situations will thus be taken a step further in the exercise now
taking shape in the Sub—Commission and will bolster the safeguards set out in
article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In
this regard the general comments of the Human Rights Committee on article 4 of
the Covenant deserve special mention.
B. Excessive or illegal use of force
root causes of summary or arbitrary executions.
174. Many deaths were reported in connection with the use of force by law
enforcement officials, security forces and armed groups acting under the
control of the authorities. In some cases force was used in the context of
public disturbance, riots or demonstrations. In other cases force,
particularly firearms, were used at the time of pursuit or arrest of criminal
suspects. In some other cases it was part of an anti—crime or anti—subversive
campaign in which criminal suspects were killed by the security forces without
any legal proceedings. In still other cases unidentified armed groups,
sot ca1led “death squads”, were responsible for killing persons suspected of
opposition to the Government. In all those cases the force used was
•d4 rpportionate to the ends sought, and was illegal.
175. In a number of countries the security forces used excessive measures to
,, ma intain public order, to contain disturbances or to quell demonstrations.
The ways in which force was used included shooting at unarmed crowds without
wapiing, shooting plastic or rubber bullets or tear—gas canisters at close
•r4 !ge., using highly hazardous and dangerous gas to quell demonstrations,
hitting brutally with clubs and other hard heavy obj ects, kicking various
parts of the body, in particular the head and stomach In several cases such
. ‘t Pessive violence went without investigation.
/
176. In Some countries deaths were reported at the time of pursuit or arrest
According to official reports criminal suspects were shot while trying to
escape or when resisting arrest, or in armed clasnes Howeve2., n a number of
it was alleged that sucn persons were first apprehended by the security
forres and then shot or killed under torture. There was frequently no
!9 em, inquest or autopsy and police reports were accepted without
! 4.nvestigation.
! 5everal countries killing of criminal suspects or suspected opponents
• Povernment took place. in many cases persons were found dead after
OE isappeared or been abducted by armed groups. In a number of cases
t?t ,showed that security forces personnel were involved in those
Igs, but in others the identity of the perpetrators was not knoWn. The
in most cases denied its responsibility for such killings 1 accusing
groups or organized ctimtnal gLoups of tuose deatus The common
of this type of killing aret (a) the victims are of similar
t B9i ,, either suspected criminals, or specific ethnic, religious or
t,groups actively opposed to the Government; (h) the armed men
• le for such killings operate with impunity; and (c) even if official
Pons are carried out in some cases, criminal charges are filed only
cases, when perpetrators are identified.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 94
178. A number of situations will be described in the following paragraphs in
order to illustrate this phenomenon.
179. In Argentina between 6,000 and 9,000 people were estimated to have
disappeared or died during the anti—subversive operations under military rule
between 1976 and 1983. Those who were killed by members of the armed forces,
were taken first to secret camps, then killed and their bodies were dumped in
remote areas. In many cases detention of the victims was never acknowledged
by the authorities.
180. By way of further example, reference may be made to the numerous persons
reported to have been killed in Chile as a result of disproportionate measures
—taken—by_the secuittty jorces, notably indiscriminate use of firearms, in
suppressing public demonstrations h i c ssive measures-used -by _the
agencies responsible for public order also caused victims among passers—by or
spectators.
181. A number of opposition leaders and activists were killed by unidentified
armed men. In some cases the deaths were imputed to police or security forces
either directly or indirectly.
182. A nunIIer of cases were the subject of investigation proceedings,
including one recent case in which three human rights activists were found
dead, mutilated, with their throats cut, after having been abducted by a group
of unidentified civilians who were heavily armed and ‘ T highly organized'. In
this case personnel of the Carabineros were implicated and the proceedings are
still pending.
183. The situation in South Africa deserves special mention. Over the past
year the world has witnessed the indiscriminate shooting down of persons
seeking to assert IIeir birthright as human beings. During 1985, at least
1,000 deaths were reported. Since the declaration of the state of emergency
on 20 July 1985, the average number of people killed every day by excessive or
illegal use of force by the law enforcement agencies has trebled. Deaths
occurring in South Africa have to be counted among the most numerous instances
of arbitrary or summary executions which have taken place in the last year.
185. In such circumstances, the Special Rapporteur noted that the perpetrators
of such alleged acts enjoyed the protection of the law. For example, under
the state of emergency, immunity is granted in regard to acts committed
throughout the entire territory (and not only the 36 original Magisterial
Districts) to:
184. It was alleged that the South African Police and the South African
Defence Forces resorted to excessive or illegal use of force, out of
proportion to the alleged purpose fo quelling riots. According to a report,
the majority of the persons who died as a result of the intervention of the
police and the defence forces were non—whites. Such acts of disproportionate
violence by the police and defence forces included indiscriminate shooting and
assaulting of unarmed crowds who gathered, demonstrated, protested against
various apartheid measures imposed by the Government, or took part in the
funerals of victims of earlier demonstrations. Innocent bystanders, including
children, were also victims. A number of victims were allegedly dragged out
of their houses and killed. A number of persons fleeing from assault by the
police were reported to have been killed on the spot, in some instances shot
at point—blank range. Some of the wounded persons died later in hospital.
H
“(a) The State;
(b) The State President;
E/CN.4/l986/21
page 95
Cc) Any member of the Cabinet of the Republic ;
Cd) Any member of a force
Ce) Any person acting by direction or with the approval of any
member or person referred to in the preceding paragraphs of this
subregulation; by reason of any act in good faith advised, commanded,
ordered directed or performed by any person in the carrying out of his .
duties, or the exercise of his powers or the performance of his functions
in terms-'of--these--reg lati sTWit iW i iiE Eo “i i i su re the safety of the
public, the maintenance of public order or IIe termination of IIe state
of emergency in any area where the existence of a state of emergency has
been declared in pursuance of section 2 Cl) of the Act, or in order to
deal with circumstances which have arisen or are likely to arise as a
result of the aforementioned state of emergency.”.
186. The members of a force include members of the army, police and prison
forces. OEe effect of this has been twofold: first the members of the armed
forces are now being involved in duties which are normally within the province
of the police in patrolling mainly black townships and do not have the
restraint which the police may or are expected to have in dealing with members
of: the public, secondly, the immunity provided by the emergency legislation
has caused the members of the forces to behave as if they have been licensed
td kill.
187. It was further alleged that a number of persons, including active
, opponents of apartheid , were killed by members of other tribal or ethnic
‘ groups with the connivance or active support of the authorities. At least
. 238 deaths were reported to have occurred in such circumstances.
188. OIIer active opponents of apartheid were killed by persons whose identity
)was alleged to have remained unknown. According to numerous witnesses, there
was va definite, systematic pattern to these killings.
189. The Special Rapporteur is pleased to note that some Governments have
repealed the immunity which given to military leaders who had, among other
acts, been involved in summary or arbitrary executions. For example, in
December 1983, upon taking office, the newly elected Government of Argentina
repealed the immunity law that the military leaders had adopted in the last
/ days of military rule, and ordered the trial by the Supreme Council of the
Armed Forces of the nine members of the three military juntas that had ruled
th couj y between 1976 and 1982; other members of the military were charged
! off ences resulting from their involvement in the ants—subversive
. the Government also established a National Commission on the
I P rance of Persons, which was charged with the investigation of the fate
}9 twhereabout$ of the disappeared persons. it received information and
on the cases of disappearance and forwarded them to the judicial
jp a ities for criminal investigation. In September 1984 the Commission
its report to the President. In October 1984 the National Court of
a for Federal Criminal and Correctional Cases decided to take over the
Feedings from the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces which had been unable
E/CN.4/1985/21
page 96
to hand down sentences within the set period of time. The Appeals Court acted
as a court of sole instance, its decision being final, unless the parties
appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice on the grounds of violtion of
constitutional rights.
191. In December 1985, after listening to 833 witnesses, the Court delivered
its verdict on the nine military leaders. Two of the nine were found guilty
of homocide, illegal detention and other human rights violations and sentenced
to life imprisonment. OEree were found guilty of the same crimes and were
were acquitted. Governments have often lacked the will to prosecute law .
enforcement officers who have committed summary or arbitrary executions. The
example given by the Government of Argentina is one to be commended or
emulated by other Governments.
192. OEere is a definite need for law enforcement officials to be given
serious and extensive training in the provisions of such documents as the Code
of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and other rules which can guide them
on how to react to tense or unpredictable situations. The Special Rapporteur
notes that for example, in Sri Lanka, an organization for human rights
promotion through law enforcement agencies has been set up under the patronage
of the President, with the Prime Minister, Chief Justice and the Leader of the
Opposition as Vice—Patrons, wiII the following objects: ,
(a) To take steps to promote and co—ordinate the work of law enforcement
officials and agencies in their recognition of and respect for human rights as
accepted and foSulated by the community of nations 1
(b) To study and formulate the principals, practices, procedures and
prerequisites for the observance of human rights in the performance of law
enforcement functions in Sri Lankay
. . . .
(c) To assist in formulating policies and codes of conduct, which
through co—ordination and integration would advance the administration of
justice in general and the observance of human rights in particular,
(d) To encourage every law enforcement official and agency to observe
the duty of disciplining themselves in conformity with the principles and
standards as formulated and the rights as embodied in the Constitution and
laws ‘of Sri Lanka and such other human rights instruments as may be ratified
by the Government of Sri Lanka;
(e) To take all necessary steps including the holding of seminars,
conferences and exhibitions, the peparation and dissemination of literature
and information for the furtherance of the above objects
193. At the international level the consideration currently being given by the
Sub—Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities to , .
this question as indeed very relevant to the campaign against arbitrary and d
summary executions At its thirty—eighth session the Sub-Commission suggeste
that the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the ,:
Treatment of Offenders study ways and means to promote international techfli
co—operation in the area of restraints on the use of force by law enforcemelt
officials and military personnel. The Sub—Commission has decided to snscfl , , ”
on the agenda of its next session a subitem entitledr “Restraints on the uS
‘,F rn a *, law nnfnrr.nn.,nF and military nersonnel “
I
E/CN. 4/1926/21
C. Deaths in custbdy
page 97
194. With regard to the treatmen of persons in the custody of law enforcement
or prison authorities, a number of international instruments set out criteria
which are accepted by international consensus. Article 7 of the
international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that “no one
shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment.” Article 5 of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
states that “no law enforcement official may inflict, instigate or tolerate
any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment, nor may any law enforcment official invoke superior orders or
except io circumstances suc asastate of war o IIreat o OE i IIreat
to national security, internal political instability or any other public
emergency as a justification of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading
,J treatment or punishment.” Rule 31 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the
Treatment of Prisoners states that “corporal punishment, punishment by placing
in a dark cell, and all cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments shall be
completely prohibited as punishments for disciplinary offences.”
195. It has been repeatedly shown that risks of death or serious injury
increase markedly in situations where persons are held in unacknowledged
and/or incommunicado detention. Death while in the custody of law enforcement
agencies or security forces constituted a widespread phenomenon. The victims
fell into different categories such as criminal suspects, opponents of the
Government and suspected guerrillas. The majority of the victims, however
would appear to have been those detained for political or security reasons.
The, purpose of their custody might have been initial detention for
Interrogation, detention without charge, detention awaiting trial, or
Imprisonment after sentencing. Death occurred most frequenly during the first .
Stage of detention, namely immediately after arrest or apprehension when
persons were held incommunicado for interrogation. It was often alleged that
Victims died under torture. In some cases persons were shot to death. In
/instances of prolonged detention or imprisonment there were cases of death due
,,JtO starvation or lack of medical attention, which were part of the punishment
.n 'detention centres, prisons, labour camps or re—education camps. It was
explained in a number of cases that the victims died of illness, committed
, suicide or were shot while trying to escape. In many cases of death in
1 Stody a post—mortem, inquest or autopsy was not carried out In a few
cases, officials responsible for such deaths were punished.
,
196. In the following paragraphs some cases will be described as illustrative
I phenomenon.
9t.A number of deaths of persons in the custody of the security forces were
j Ported in Chile. It was alleged that the persons died as a result of
: cuttu during interrogation According to the Government, cases of deaths in
jr&' 'b' have been the subject of court proceedings in order to determine the
,. %.. ecise circumstances of the deaths and those responsible for them”
l9a
t was alleged that in the Islamic Republic of Iran a number of persons
detained for their suspected opposition to the Governemnt or for
5'rnembership of ethnic or religious groups were tortured to death or
1. executed without trial. The exact number of deaths or executions was
. 1UlOWn,
-‘ —
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 98
199. It was alleged IIat in Iraq a number of persons, suspected of opposition
to the Governemnt, were detained incommunicado, died as a result of torture
during interrogation, or were executed without trial. According to the
Government's communication those persons were executed ‘after proper
investigation and trial during which they enjoyed all of the legally
prescribed safeguards.” In spite of the Government's contention, no legal
proceedings were known or made available concerning those cases.
200. Several deaths in police custody were reported in Paraguay. In one case
a person died as a result of maltreatment by IIe police after having been
arrested. Although the police stated that the person committed suicide, the
post—mortem reportedly indicated that the cause of death was head injuries.
201. A number of persons were alleged to have died in prison in Sierra Leone;
due to malnutrition.
202. OEe Special Rapporteur received information on numerous instances of
deaths alleged to have occurred in South Africa as a result of ill—treatment
by police during the initial period of police custody as well as during
detention. OEe Special Rapporteur received considerable information, both
orally and in writing, which indicated IIat IIere was overwhelming evidence of
assault of detainees in police custody, especially of those opposed to
apartheid , and IIis in a systematic pattern.
203. Under section 29 of the Internal Security Act any police officer of the
rank of lieutenant—colonel and up, is permitted to order the detention of a
person for up to 30 days without the written authority of the Minister of Law
and Order. OEis initial detention can be extended by periodical review by IIe
Minister of Law and Order and by a Board of Review to an indefinite period for
IIe “purposes of interrogation”. .
205. In a number of cases of detention, application was filed to the court on
behalf of the detained persons to grant interim orders to restrain police from
assaulting persons who were in police custody for investigation.
206. The foregoing paragraphs have been included because, as the
Special Rapporteur has noted in his previous reports, there is a very close
nexus between torture in detention and death in detention. Where there i S a
high incidence of torture or assault on persons in the custody of law
enforcement officers there are bound to be deaths arising out of these acts.
204. It was reported IIat a large number of detainees under the state of
emergency were assaulted in police custody before they were transferred to
detention facilities. In September 1985, Dr. Wendy Orr, a district surgeon in
the Port Elizabeth area, submitted evidence to the Supreme Court of widespread
and regular torture and ill—treatment of detainees held under the state of
emergency. The Supreme Court reportedly granted her application for a court
order restraining IIe police from assaulting IIe emergency detainees held at
St. Alban's and North End prisons in Port Elizabeth, as well as any people
detained in future under the Emergency Regulations in the Port Elizabeth and
Uitenhage Magisterial District.
E/CN. 4/1986/21
page 99
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
207. Since the Special Rapporteur's last report submitted a year ago, the
question of arbitrary and summary executions has remained one of the most
urgent problems on the international human rights agenda which is deserving of
the utmost priority attention. There realty has been no respite in the number
of such executions. If the number has gonC down in one situation, it has been
0 ffset by an increase in others and, overall, the problem has remained acute.
The Special Rapporteur is therefore strongly of the view that the
international community should continue to monitor the phenomenon of summary
or arbitrary executions and in particular to devise ways and means of
. jntetvt ng or
arbitrary execution.
208. As can be seen in this report, there are a number of organs or bodies of
the United Nations and other international organizations which touch on some
aspects of this problem, such as the Human Rights Committee, the
Sub-Commission, the United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the
Treatment of Offenders, the International Criminal Police Organization, the
special Rapporteurs on country situations and the Working Groups on various
topics or countries. There is need for co—ordination between these
i istitutions and with the Special Rapporteur so that more concerted efforts in
both the short— and long—term can- be brought to bear in dealing with the
. immediate problems and the underlying causes of summary or arbitrary
execution For example, the Special Rapporteur found the joint hearings in
: Lusaka with the Chairman of the Ad Hoc working Group of Experts on
southern Africa very valuable for his work
209 One of the ways in which Governments can show that they want this
abh6rrent phenomenon of arbitrary or summary executions eliminated is by
investigating, holding inquests, prosecuting and punishing those found
guilty There is therefore a need to develop international standards designed
to ensure that investigations are conducted into all cases of suspicious death
and in particular those at IIe hands of the law enforcement agencies in all
situations, such standards should Lnclude adequate autopsy A death in any
type' of custody should be regarded as prima facie a summary or arbitrary
execution and appropriate investigations should immediately be made to confirm
or rebut the presumption. OEe results of investigations should be made public
210 It has come to the notice of the special Rapporteur that some national
1 ? , gislations and regulations do not conform to the requirements that the right
oZlife shall be protected by law and that no one shall be arbitrarily
eprived of his life as stated in article 6, paragraph 1, of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights It is important to stress that the
7 ta r Rights Committee has interpreted this to mean that the law must strictly
9,9tol and limit the circumstances in which a person may be deprived of his
‘ by the authorities of the State. The safeguard provided in article 4,
, graph 2 which does not permit derogation of this fundamental right to life
,Jtt in times of public emergency is not reflected in many national
- 9i.slations and regulations. A study should therefore be made in this area
States should ensure that their national legislations conform to the
t;t :• tionally accepted standards.
4 , ' .,,:,
E/CN .4/1986/21
page 10 0
211. The nunIIer of deaths in custody are increasing alarmingly. It is
therefore imperative that Governments should in all such cases:
(a) Disclose the identity, location and condition of all persons
arrested or detained by members of their police, military or security
authorities or others acting with their knowledge;
(b) Disclose the reason for the detention;
(c)A11o t or permit access to the detained person by an advocate and/or
relative. .
212. The Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate his appeal to Governments
to ratify international covenants such as the International Convenant on Civil
and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishi nent and the Four Geneva Conventions.
213. In conclusion, the special Rapporteur would like to refer to one issue
which he feels deserving of further consideration by the Commission. The
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights proscribes the
application of the death penalty to any one below the age of 18 at the time
when the offence was committed. While some reservations have been formally
entered to this provision, the Covenant nevertheless has a special status,
having been proclaimed and adopted by IIe General Assembly and having received
for the most part widespread acknowledgement throughout the international
community. In some recent instances the attention of the Special Rapporteur
has been drawn to persons executed or about to be executed, having been duly
convicted and sentenced in accordance with the law alIIough it has been
established beyond doubt that they were under 18 years of age when the crimes
in question were committed. These executions have posed a difficult principle
for the Special Rapporteur because, while it is clear that the persons in
question were duly tried and sentenced and had every opportunity to appeal,
the point nevertheless remains that a United Nations standard of global
validity was not adhered to. The Special Rapporteur feels that this issue
deserves further examination and he would be grateful for such guidance as the
Commission may be able to offer on this question.
E/CN. 4/19 56/21
Annex I
page 1
Annex I
ECONOMIC AND SOCIIUJ COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1985/40
Summary or arbitrary execution
The Economic and Social Council,
Recalling IIe Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees the
right to life, liberty and security of person,
____________ International Covenant on Civil
and Political Bights, in which it is stated that every human being has the
inherent right to life, that this right shall be protected by law and that no
one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life,
Recalling General Assembly resolution 34/175 of 17 December 1979, in
which the Assembly reaffirmed that mass and flagrant violations of human
rights were of special concern to the United Nations and urged the Commission
on. Human Bights to take timely and effective action in existing and future
cases of mass and flagrant violations of human rights,
Mindful of General I&ssembly resolutions 35/22 of 9 November 1981, 37/182
of 17 December 1982, 38/96 of 16 December 1983 and 39/110 of 14 December 1984,
Taking note of resolution 1982/13 of 7 September 1982 of the
.. Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities,
:: in which the Sub-Coxmpjssion recommended that effective measures should be
adopted to prevent the occurrence of summary or arbitrary executions,
Taking note also of the work done by the Committee on Crime Prevention
and Control in the area of summary and arbitrary executions, a/ including the
. ! boration of minimum legal guarantees and safeguards to prevent recourse to
- ‘ch extra—legal executions, to be considered by the Seventh United Nations
Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1985,
r Deeply alarmed at the occurrence on a large scale of summary or arbitrary
executions, including extra—legal executions,
1. Strongly deplores , once again, the large number of summary or
arbitrary executions, including eflra—legal executions, which continue to take
/ Place in various parts of the world,
2. Appeals urgently to Governments, United Nations bodies, the
_ Lt 8 !i ?Eia1ized agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and
organizations to take effective action to combat and
Qllninate summary or arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions
a/ See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 1984 ,
(E/l994/15), chap. VII.
I
F/CM. 4/1986/21
Annex I
page 2
3. Takes note with appreciation of the report of Mr. S. ioeos Wako,
Special Papporteur; h/
4. Decides to continue the mandate of the Special Rapporteur,
Mr. S. imos Wako, for another year, in order to enable him to submit further
conclusions and recommendations to the Commission;
5. Requests the Special Rapporteur in carrying out his mandate to
continue to examine situations of summary or arbitrary executions,
6. Requests the Special Rapporteur in carrying out his mandate to
respond effectively to information that comes before him, in particular when a
summary or arbitrary execution is imminent or threatened,
7.' Considers that the Special Rapporteur in carrying out his mandate
should continue to seek and receive information from Governments,
United Nations bodies, specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental
organizations and non—governmental organizations in consultative status with
: ! the Economic and Social Council and to take due account of official
: declarations and government information which come to his attention;
U' 8. Requests the Secretary—General to continue to provide all necessary
‘ assistance to the Special Rapporteur so that he may carry out his mandate
effectively,
9. Urges all Governments and all others concerned to co—operate with
and assist the Special Rapporteur; .
10. Requests IIe Commission on Human Rights to consider the question of
,‘ . summary or arbitrary executions as a matter of high priority at its
forty—second session under the item entitled “Question of the violation of
! .‘ ‘ human rights and fundamental freedoms in any part of the world, with
particular reference to colonial and other dependent countries and
territories”.
25th plenary meeting : !
30 May 1985
hi E/CN.4/1985/l7. ‘
E/CN. 4/1986/21
Annex II
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 40/143
Summary or arbitrary executions
The General Assembly ,
Deeply alarmed at the continued occurrence on a large scale of summary or
arbitrary executions, including extra—legal executions,
Recalling resolution 1982/13 of 7 September 1982 of the Sub—Commission on
Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, in which the
SubCommjssion recommended that effective measures should be adopted to
prevent the occurrence of summary or arbitrary executions,
Annex II
page 1
Recalling the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
which states that every human being has the right to life, liberty and
security of person,
Having regard to the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, which states that every human being has the inherent
right to life, that this right shall be protected by law and that no one shall
f l be arbitrarily deprived of his life,
Recalling its resolution 34/175 of 17 December 1979, in which it
: reaffirmed that mass and flagrant violations of human rights are of special
concern to the United Nations and urged the Commission on Human Rights to take
timely and effective action in existing and future cases of mass and flagrant
violations of human rights,
Recalling further its resolution 36/22 of 9 November 1981, in which it
condemned the practice of summary or arbitrary executions, and its
resolutions 37/182 of 17 December 1982, 38/96 of 16 December 1983 and 39/110
14 December 1984,
Welcoming Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 24 Nay 1984
containing safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing
the death penalty, which resolution was endorsed by the Seventh United Nations
Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, as well as
the 0 flgoing work on summary or arbitrary executions within the Committee on
Crime Prevention and Control,
Illrixicednced of the need for appropriate action to combat and eventually
ell lflinate the practice of summary or arbitrary executions, which represents a
lagra violation of the most fundamental human right, the right to life,
strongly condemns the large number of summary or arbitrary
tltlons, including extra—legal executions, which continue to take place in
flous parts of the world,
E/CN. 4/. . 986/21
Annex I I
page 2
2. Demands that the practice of summary or arbitrary executions be
brought to an end;
3 Welcomes Economic and Social Council resolution 1982/35 ot
7 May 1982, in which the Council decided to appoint for one year a
Special Rapporteur to examine the questions related to summary or arbitrary
executions 1
4 Also welcomes Economic and Social Council reso].utaon 1985/40 of
3O 24ay. -l985 r in - which the Council the mandate of the
Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. A Wako, for a further year and requested the
Comnu.ssion on Human Rights to consider the question of summary or arbitrary
executions as a matter of high priority at its forty—second session;
5. Urges all Governments and all others Concerned to co—operate with
and assist the Special Rapporteur in the implementation of his mandate p
6 Requests the Special Rapporteur, in carrying out his mandate, to
respond effectively to information that comes before him, in particular when a
summary or arbitrary execution is imminent or threatened, or when such an
execution has recently occurred;
7. Requests further the Special Rapporteur to consider in his next
report possible measures to be taken by the appropriate authorities when a :::
death occurs in custody, including adequate autopsy;
8. Considers that the Special Rapporteur, in carrying out his mandate, :
should continue to seek and receive information from Governments,
United iqations bodies, specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental
organizations and non—governmental organizations in consultative status with
the Economic and Social Council 7
11
9. Requests the Secretary—General to provide all necessary assistance
to the Special Rapporteur so that he may effectively carry out his mandate;
10. Again requests the Secretary—General to continue to use his best
endeavours in cases where the minimum standard of legal safegtiards provided
for in articles 6, 14 and 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights appear not to be respected;
11. Requests the Commission on Buman Rights at its forty—second session,
on the basis of the report of the Special Rapporteur to be prepared in
conformity with Economic and Social Council resolutions 1982/35, 1983/36,
1984/35 and 1985/40, to make recommendations concerning appropriate action to
combat and eventually eliminate the abhorrent practice of summary or arbitrary
executions.
l1C4.1 nienary meeting
. . . . . -
13 December 1985
—
‘ . . . .... . ........ . . . - 1
E/CN.4/1986/21
. Annex II I
Annex III
NOTE VERBILLE DATED 16 AUGUST 1985 FROM THE SECRETARY—GENERAL
TO GOVERNMENTS
The Secretary—General of the United Nations presents his compliments to
the Minister for Foreign Affairs of ... and has the honour to refer to
Economic and Social Council resolution 1985/40 of 30 May 1985, entitled
“summary or arbitrary executions”. A copy of the resolution is attached to
this note. By this resolution the Council decided to continue the mandate of
the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. Amos Wako, for another year, in order to enable
hinutp submit further conclusions and recommendations-to-the--Commission-on — -—--
Human Rights. .
OEe Special Rapporteur wishes to make reference to last year's note
addressed to His Excellency's Government with a view to requesting certain
information relevant to the Special Rapporteur's mandate. The .
Special Rapporteur would like to reiterate the request for information as
contained in the note verbale dated 21 September 1984 (copy attached) and to
emphasize that he would appreciate, in particular, information on legislation
and/or jiteasures taken or envisaged, concerning safeguards designed to protect
the individual against the violation of the right to life- The
Special Rapporteur would also welcome any oIIer observarions that
His Excellency's Government may wish to make in this connection.
The Secretary—General would be grateful if any information which
His Excellency's Government might wish to forward, as requested, could be
transmitted to the Assistant Secretary—General for Human Rights,
United Nations Office at Geneva, if possible before 1 october 1985.
16 August 1985
