
	by David Hill 
	29 June 2014
	
	from
	
	TheGuardian Website
	 
						
	
	 
	
	
	Law exempts soldiers and police
	
	
	from criminal responsibility 
	
	if they cause injuries or deaths
	
 
	
	 
	
	
	
	Peruvian security 
	forces arrest a protester in June 2009 
	
	during conflict that led to 
	more than 30 people dying and over 200 injured. 
	
	Photograph: AP
 
	
	 
	
	
	Some of the recent media coverage about the fact that more than 50 people in 
	Peru - the vast majority of them indigenous - are on trial following 
	protests and fatal conflict in the Amazon over five years ago missed a 
	crucial point. 
	
	 
	
	Yes, the hearings are finally going ahead and 
	the charges are widely held to be trumped-up, but what about the government 
	functionaries who apparently gave the riot police the order to attack the 
	protestors, the police themselves, and - following 
	
	Wikileaks' revelations of 
	cables in which the U.S. ambassador in Lima criticized the Peruvian 
	government's, "reluctance to use force" and wrote there could be 
	"implications for the recently implemented Peru-U.S. FTA" if the protests 
	continued - the role of the U.S. government?
	
	The conflict broke out in northern Peru after mainly indigenous
	
	Awajúns and Wampis had been peacefully 
	protesting a series of new laws which were supposedly emitted to comply with 
	a trade agreement between Peru and the U.S. and which made it easier, among 
	other things, for extractive industries to exploit natural resources in 
	their territories. 
	
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	 
				
				
				AMAZONIA FOR SALE
	
	
	 
	
	
		
			
				
					
						
						The Awajun people (also 
						known as the Aguaruna) have inhabited the Amazon 
						rainforest since time immemorial, living in harmony with 
						- and respectful of - nature. 
						 
						
						This ecological balance is 
						now being threatened by a growing interest on the part 
						of the Peruvian government and national and 
						international companies in indiscriminately exploiting 
						the area’s mineral, timber and oil resources.
						
						
						As a result of this plan, promoted by the state in the 
						name of progress and economic development, the original 
						inhabitants of these lands are now threatened by 
						pollution, illness and desertification.
						
						
						This documentary tells the story of the Awajun people’s 
						resistance and struggle for their dignity and territory, 
						both now and in the future, seeking to avoid the tragic 
						experience to which many of Latin America’s native 
						peoples have already succumbed. 
						 
						 
						
						"Amazonia for Sale" was 
						produced by Ore Media, the International Work Group for 
						Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) and the Organization for the 
						Development of Border Communities of the Cenepa River (ODECOFROC), 
						a group made up of 56 Awajun and Wampis communities.
					
				
			
		
	
	
	 
	
	
	 
	
	 
	
	 
	
	Following a blockade of a highway near a town 
	called Bagua - and an agreement that the protestors would break up and go 
	home, reached the day before - early on 5 June the police moved to clear it 
	and started shooting. 
	
	 
	
	In the ensuing conflict, 10 police officers, 
	five indigenous people and five non-indigenous civilians were killed, more 
	than 200 injured - at least 80 of whom were shot - and, elsewhere in the 
	
	Bagua region, a further 11 police officers were killed after being taken 
	hostage.
	
		
		"So far only protesters have been brought to 
		trial," said Amnesty International in a statement marking five years 
		since the conflict and pointing out that human rights lawyers have said 
		there is no serious evidence linking the accused to the crimes they are 
		being prosecuted for - which include homicide and rebellion. 
		 
		
		"[S]o far little progress has been made to 
		determine the responsibility of the security forces. Likewise, no 
		progress has been made to investigate the political authorities who gave 
		the orders to launch the police operation."
	
	
	Does this desperate failure of justice not 
	effectively constitute a "licence to kill" for the police? 
	
	 
	
	Maybe, maybe not, but whatever the answer Peru 
	has now formalized that licence by emitting a law that, as the Dublin-based 
	NGO Front Line Defenders (FLD) puts it, grants:
	
		
		...members of the armed forces and the 
		national police exemption from criminal responsibility if they cause 
		injury or death, including through the use of guns or other weapons, 
		while on duty. 
		
		 
		
		Human rights groups, both nationally and internationally, 
		the Human Rights Ombudsman (Defensoria del Pueblo) as well as the UN 
		High Commissioner for Human Rights all expressed deep concern about the 
		law. 
		
		 
		
		In the words of the [Lima-based] Instituto Libertad y Democracia [IDL], 
		the law equates, in practice, to a "licence to kill."
	
	
	That 
	
	law, no. 30151, was promulgated in January 
	this year and is, according to the IDL's Juan José Quispe, a 
	modification of existing legislation passed by the previous government.
	
	
	 
	
	The modification consists of replacing three 
	words - "en forma reglamentaria" - with another five - "u otro medio de 
	defensa" - which Quispe says means that any soldier or police officer can 
	now kill or injure a civilian without needing to use his or her weapon 
	"according to regulations", or by using something other than his or her 
	weapon.
	
		
		"We continue considering this law as one 
		that grants the armed forces as well as the national police a licence to 
		kill," Quispe told the Guardian. 
		
		 
		
		"It permits a high degree of impunity. 
		During the repression of social protests, police officers and soldiers 
		who cause injuries or deaths will now be exempt from criminal 
		responsibility."
	
	
	Quispe says that the exemption will also apply 
	to police or soldiers who, in the fight against narco-terrorism in 
	particular, accidentally kill civilians.
	
		
		"It's a dangerous law and constitutes a 
		threat to everyone," he says. 
		
		 
		
		"It permits the use of weapons by 
		contravening existing law and international parameters such as the 
		United Nations' Principles. It gives soldiers and police officers a 
		carte blanche to commit crimes with impunity."
	
	
	The controversial law was highlighted by the FLD 
	in a report published this month titled "Environmental Rights Defenders at 
	Risk in Peru." 
	
	 
	
	What that report makes clear is that if you're 
	Peruvian and you publicly express concern about the environmental and social 
	impacts of mining operations you can expect the following: 
	
		
		death threats, rape threats, physical and 
		electronic surveillance, smears and stigmatization by national 
		mainstream media, police acting as, "private security" for mining 
		companies, confiscation or theft of equipment, "excessive use of force 
		by police" during protests, arrest, or detention, and prosecution on 
		charges of, "rebellion, terrorism, violence, usurpation, trespassing, 
		disobedience or resistance to an official order, obstructing public 
		officers, abduction, outrage to national symbols, criminal damage, 
		causing injury, coercion, disturbance or other public order offences."
	
	
	While the FLD's report acknowledges that the 
	"vast majority" of court proceedings have ended in acquittals or with the 
	charges dropped, it argues that the "extraordinary use" of lawsuits 
	constitutes an,
	
		
		"abusive use of the judicial system" and 
		impedes "the work of the [accused], affecting their reputation and 
		furthering the view - often upheld by national media - that they are 
		violent extremists. This is especially the case when accusations of 
		terrorism, rebellion or violence are levied." 
	
	
	It states that almost 400 people currently face 
	court proceedings, and cites one man as an example, Milton Sanchez Cubas, 
	who has faced roughly 50 but never been convicted.
	
	The FLD's report ends with a serious of recommendations to Peru's 
	government, including that the "licence to kill" law is repealed.
	
		
		"All documented instances of intimidation, 
		death threats, physical attacks, surveillance, stigmatization, smear 
		campaigns, and judicial harassment appear to be directly related to 
		legitimate and peaceful work," it states, "in particular in supporting... local communities opposed to mining projects and their impact on 
		their environment, territory and livelihood."