Peru's denialist response to the Inter-American Court He ignored the ruling that refused to release Fujimori but denied the contempt charge

From Lima

The Peruvian government faces the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IAC Court). The International Court accused Dina Bolwarti's regime of contempt By releasing former dictator Alberto Fujimori, after he was found guilty of crimes against humanity, and failing to comply with the decisions of the Inter-American Court against this pardon, the government responded on Friday by defending this release and saying that “there was no contempt.” A response that defies reason, laden with denial. Which amounts to absurdity and nonsense in ensuring that the decisions of the Inter-American Court are respected while those decisions are not adhered to by releasing Fujimori.

For the Inter-American Court, the pardon is illegal

The Inter-American Court gave the government until March to respond to charges of contempt for its decisions to release Fujimori on December 7, after the Constitutional Court revived a 2017 amnesty that had been annulled for not meeting the pardon criteria. Humanitarian amnesty. The Inter-American Court opposed Fujimori's release because it considered the pardon illegal, as part of its pursuit of his sentences for the Barrios Altos and La Cantota massacres. Until those responsible for these crimes are tried and the sentences issued against them are implemented. In these two cases Fujimori was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

The Bolwart government decided to provide its response in March with a statement issued by the Ministries of State, Justice and Human Rights, in which it was signed that the government “fully respects” the American Convention on Human Rights. international rights and treaties – which he violated to release Fujimori – and asserts, challenging reasons, that the ruling of the Inter-American Court on Barrios Altos and La Cantota has already been implemented and is “being implemented” – in compliance with this ruling this would imply that Fujimori is serving his sentence, which has not happened After his release – therefore, “there was no contempt.” A brief text, but it reveals the cynicism of a government that brazenly alters reality to hide its responsibilities, without being ashamed. The same irony with which Bolwart repeats that the 49 who died in the social protests against his government due to security forces shooting at unarmed demonstrators, and even against residents who did not participate in the protests, died “in confrontations.”

Ridiculous and shameful

“The government’s statement in response to the Inter-American Court is ridiculous. It is a decision that causes shame“, pointing to Page/12 Carlos RiveraA lawyer specializing in human rights Institute of Legal Defense (IDL). Rivera says: “The Peruvian state has not only placed itself in a clear position of contempt for international law, but from now on it has becomeIt has been placed in a state of international ridicule. It is intended to contradict a precise and long resolution, 29 pages long and three paragraphsThe goal is to deny the situation that the whole world witnessed: the release of Fujimori in contravention of the decisions of the Inter-American Court. The Peruvian state wants to ridicule the court by saying that it has great respect for these organizations, but Fujimori remains free and practically tells it: “I am not interested in your position and I do not know your jurisdiction.” This puts Peru in a confrontation position before an international court, where it will lose.“.

Rivera doubts that the government is defending Fujimori's release, saying it is complying with the decisions of internal judicial bodies, such as the Technical Committee, “which is not sustainable because It has long been decided that provisions of domestic law cannot conflict with decisions of international law., not to mention the decisions of international judicial organizations, such as Corre IDH. The Vienna Convention has been saying this for more than 50 years. It is also unacceptable for the Executive Council of Peru to be able to refer to the powers of the international court, as it is intended to do. The lawyer, who represents victims from Barrios Altos and La Cantota, notes that after receiving a response from the Peruvian government in March, the Inter-American Court must call a hearing and then, “in approximately two months,” issue a decision. He points out that “there will be a way to appeal Fujimori's pardon and release in the local judiciary.”

Gloria Canoboss Human Rights Association Abrode, who is also the lawyer for the victims of Barrios Altos and La Cantita, points out that the government's response to the Inter-American Court “is an insistence on contempt.” He describes this response as “a pure mockery of saying 'I commit' when it is not fulfilled. It is like saying 'I do not hit you, but I still hit you'.” “The executive authority intends to deny everything, but this time I believe that denial will not succeed in getting rid of responsibilities. The court’s decision is strong.”. Kano considers Fujimori's release a violation of international law that could lead to the imposition of sanctions. “The Court has already taken the decision to inform the OAS General Assembly that Peru does not comply with international standards. Sanctions may come. There are treaties such as the Free Trade Agreement with the European Union that contain clauses related to democracy and human rights, and they could be affected. As well as Peru's planned accession to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. “The situation in Peru is already complicated, but if they continue this disrespect it will become even more complicated.”