Abigail and Adam discuss the Cancún summit, human rights in Venezuela, reelection in Colombia, and Hillary Clinton's trip to the region next week.

The "Just the Facts" podcast is available here and on iTunes. Thank you for listening.

Download

This is cross-posted from the Latin America Working Group's blog, the LAWG Blog. It was written by Lisa Haugaard.

As National Party leader Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo is inaugurated president of Honduras, we can’t just pretend the June 28th coup and its bitter aftermath never occurred.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights just released a devastating 147-page catalogue of the violations of human rights and civil liberties that have occurred since the coup in Honduras.

The Commission writes, “Along with the loss of institutional legitimacy brought about by the coup d’état, during its visit the Commission confirmed that serious human rights violations had been committed, including killings, an arbitrary declaration of a state of emergency, disproportionate use of force against public demonstrations, criminalization of public protest, arbitrary detention of thousands of persons, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, poor detention conditions, militarization of Honduran territory, an increase in incidents of racial discrimination, violations of women’s rights, severe and arbitrary restrictions on the right to freedom of expression, and serious violations of political rights.  The Commission also established that judicial remedies were ineffective in protecting human rights.”

As the new government takes office, we should look back at these extensive series of abuses to get a feel for the ground that must be covered by the new administration in restoring human rights and civil liberties and repairing and improving the institutions of democracy, including judicial agencies and law enforcement, that so notably failed in their mission to protect the citizens’ rights.  Joe Eldridge and Vicki Gass spell out in the Huffington Post some of the steps that are needed to rebuild democracy in Honduras.

And the U.S. government, which condemned the coup but failed in the end to strongly defend democracy and human rights, has an absolute obligation to press the new government to fully restore the democratic rights that have been so severely eroded.  This includes restoring human rights protections and civil liberties, establishing a truth commission, investigating and prosecuting the abuses that occurred, and launching a meaningful national dialogue involving broad sectors of Honduran society.

CIP Intern Hannah Brodlie compiled this collection of recent reports of friction between governments and the news media throughout Latin America. Concerns about freedom of the press are on the increase. 

• A massive September 10 tax raid on Argentina’s largest newspaper publisher, Grupo Clarín, fueled nationwide controversy over President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner's proposed media bill. The “Media Reform Bill” would replace broadcast regulations dating back to 1980 with the stated goal of increasing competition and preventing media monopolies. It would force some of the biggest media groups (especially Clarín) to sell their assets. Critics of the bill insist that the raid and the bill stem from a personal grudge between the government and the newspaper, and argue that the law would allow “direct and indirect government control over media and journalistic content." See this Houston Chronicle article for the troubling details of the increasingly personal fight between Clarín and the Kirchners (the president and her predecessor and husband, Néstor Kirchner).

• In July the Venezuelan government closed 34 radio stations and two small television stations for allegedly failing to comply with regulations, and they’ve opened investigations into more than 200 others. In addition, attacks by pro-government militants on Globovisión, the only strongly anti-Chavez station in the country, have been largely ignored by officials. In fact, Venezuelan prosecutors recently opened a criminal probe into Globovisión to determine whether they were trying to incite rebellion by airing a string of text messages from viewers, some of which called for a coup.

• In Ecuador, television station Telemazonas has also been accused of broadcasting a secret government recording of a meeting President Rafael Correa held in his office. The station's director has said that the participants in the meeting were speaking of “public matters,” referring to how they had passed the constitution through the constituent assembly in 2008. Telemazonas is accused of violating media regulations and broadcasting law for the fourth time, and President Correa has said he will ask for its closure.

• Despite a recent statement from President Álvaro Uribe reiterating the government’s commitment to journalistic freedom in Colombia, the recent discovery that opposition journalists were a major target of years of illegal wiretapping and surveillance from the presidential intelligence service (DAS) suggests otherwise. For example, according to the Foundation for Press Freedom, the number of press freedom violations increased drastically due to the DAS activities, from January to June of 2009 compared with the same period in 2008.

• In Nicaragua, President Daniel Ortega has also been publicly attacking the media, saying that he considers his critics in the press to be “weapons” of his political enemies. He has called on his party to close ranks against media critics and religious leaders who “generate” opposition. Ortega has said that "the State must act as necessary to regulate the activity of the media." A Ley de Colegio de Periodistas would do just that: establish “ethical” regulations for journalism and introduce conditions for its practice.

• At the end of July, the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights noted, "During this year, at least nine reporters have been killed in the region for reasons that may have been related to their journalistic activity. Three of these reporters were killed in Mexico."

Over the past week, a spotlight has turned onto an ongoing lawsuit against U.S. oil company Chevron-Texaco before a court in Ecuador. The Washington Post, NPR and 60 Minutes have all run stories on the case against Chevron (who bought Texaco in 2001 and inherited the lawsuit) and the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission held a hearing last week on "Indigenous Communities, Environmental Degradation and International Human Rights Standards," where oil contamination in Ecuador, in addition to Nigeria and West Papua, was a major topic of discussion.

The lawsuit was originally filed by indigenous and campesino Ecuadorians in a New York District Court in 1993 but, according to NPR, "Chevron argued that the case be moved to Ecuador, saying that Ecuadorian courts were impartial and professional." In 2003, proceedings began in Ecuador, in the small Amazonian city of Lago Agrio, (the town was founded by Texaco in the 1970s when oil production began in the region, named after the town of Sour Lake, Texas, where Texaco got its start). Today, Chevron is arguing that Ecuador's judicial system is "corrupt and politicized," according to Silvia Garrigo, Chevron's manager of global issues and policy.

This change of posture seems to coincide with the impression that Chevron appears likely to lose the case in Ecuador. Especially after the court-appointed environmental expert, Richard Cabrera, sided with the plaintiffs in his report. Cabrera has assessed damages at up to $27.3 billion, "dwarfing the $3.9 billion awarded against ExxonMobil for the 1989 spill in Alaska," according to Juan Forero of the Washington Post.

Yet according to Chevron, "in the thousands of soil and water samples that we have taken in the Amazon, there has been no detection of any type of toxin that is not naturally occurring in the environment, and that is dangerous to human health or the environment." Silvia Garrigo continues to explain this to 60 Minutes' Scott Pelley by comparing the oil that remains in the water and the soil of Ecuador's Amazon to the makeup on her face, saying that "I have make up on, and there's naturally occurring oil on my face. Doesn't mean that I'm going to get sick from it."

While the final verdict on whether or not Chevron is guilty of spilling and dumping millions of gallons of oil and production wastes into the Ecuadorian Amazon is dependent on the decision of the Lago Agrio based judge, Juan Nuñez, the hearing last week made the point that regardless of who is culpable, a humanitarian and environmental emergency is taking place in the Ecuadorian Amazon and affecting the thousands of people who live there - causing cancer, skin rashes, and other health problems, as well as killing off native species and harming the traditional livelihoods of many indigenous communities whose ancestral lands have been overtaken by oil companies and the towns built up around the oil industry.

As pointed out during the first panel of the hearing last week, there are various human rights instruments, including the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, under which the rights of communities affected by oil pollution should be upheld. The witnesses noted that even the most basic rights, such as the right to shelter, the right to an adequate standard of living and the right to health, are being violated by oil contamination. However, how to address this violation of rights is a difficult question to answer.

Potential measures that could be taken, all brought up at the hearing, included more regulation and monitoring on the part of the transnational corporation's home state or country, ratification of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by the U.S., and increased aid to affected communities, such as those in the Ecuadorian Amazon, to address its immediate and emergency humanitarian needs.

CIP staff traveled to Ecuador last November, where they witnessed much of the environmental degradation and health problems caused by the incredibly large amounts of oil contamination that remains in communities surrounding Lago Agrio, Ecuador. Regardless of who is at fault, a humanitarian emergency exists there and steps must be taken to help those in need. Photos from our trip can be found on Flickr here and here.

At 1:00 p.m. today, President Bush will award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, along with two former prime ministers: Tony Blair of the UK and John Howard of Australia. Many NGOs, including the Center for International Policy, Latin America Working Group, and the Washington Office on Latin America, have taken the opportunity to criticize Bush's decision to grant this award to President Uribe, describing it as "a disturbing example of the Bush administration's disregard for serious human rights concerns out of zeal to show unconditional support to governments that it views as strategic allies."

Yesterday, the Latin America Working Group created the LAWG Heroes of the Year award to "honor the many brave Colombian human rights activists who've worked tirelessly to end the Colombian army's killings of civilians." On the blog "Plan Colombia and Beyond," Adam Isacson adds to the concern, writing that "as Álvaro Uribe is honored Tuesday, though, we just wish that a U.S. government would someday offer similar recognition to Colombia's thousands of other heroes . . . who dream of living in a democracy under a strong rule of law."

The joint statement by seven U.S. organizations is below and can be found on the Human Rights Watch website.

For Immediate Release

US: Award to Uribe Sends Wrong Message
Colombia’s Rights Violations Should Bar Its Leader From Award

(Washington, DC, January 12, 2009) – US President George W. Bush’s decision to award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to President Álvaro Uribe of Colombia is a disturbing example of the Bush administration’s disregard for serious human rights concerns out of zeal to show unconditional support to governments that it views as strategic allies, seven leading nongovernmental organizations said today.

The organizations include Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International-USA, Center for International Policy, Human Rights First, Latin America Working Group, Refugees International, and the Washington Office on Latin America.

Bush is giving the award to Uribe at a ceremony in the White House on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

“The Bush administration has consistently turned a blind eye to Colombia’s serious human rights violations,” said the organizations. “Its selection of Uribe to receive this award only further tarnishes the Bush administration’s own reputation on human rights issues in the region.”

The groups pointed out that President Uribe has repeatedly taken steps and carried out policies that are damaging to human rights in Colombia.

Under President Uribe’s watch, there has been a dramatic increase in reports of extrajudicial killings of civilians by the Colombian Army. And while Uribe’s government has strongly confronted the abusive left-wing guerrillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Uribe has failed to take a similarly clear stance against equally abusive drug-running paramilitary groups, who have massacred, raped, and forcibly displaced thousands of Colombians in recent decades. Fundamental flaws in a paramilitary demobilization process under Uribe have permitted many of the groups to continue to engage in abuses under new names. The president’s verbal attacks on his country’s human rights defenders have been frequent and disturbing. And Uribe has often opposed efforts to break paramilitaries’ influence in the political system, including by making unfounded accusations against the Supreme Court justices who are investigating more than 70 members of the Colombian Congress for links to paramilitaries.

Download:(PDF, 3.78 MB) A Compass for Colombia Policy (PDF, 3.95 MB) Un nuevo rumbo para la política estadounidense hacia Colombia

October 22, 2008

New Report Outlines a Just and Effective Foreign Policy toward Colombia

(English PDF, 3.78 MB) | (PDF en español, 3.95 MB).

During their final presidential debate, Senators Barack Obama and John McCain expressed markedly different opinions on U.S. policy toward Colombia, an important partner in Latin America. Yet the next U.S. president won’t just be debating policy, he will be making it—and in the case of Colombia, he will need more than minor changes along the margins. He will need a new approach.

The Compass for Colombia Policy, written by some of Washington’s top Colombia experts, offers a better way forward for one of the main foreign policy challenges that the next administration will face. This report makes a detailed, persuasive case for a new U.S. strategy that would achieve our current policy goals while ending impunity and strengthening respect for human rights. Instead of risking all by placing too much faith in a single, charismatic leader, the United States must appeal to the aspirations and needs of all Colombians by strengthening democratic institutions, such as the judiciary. In particular, the United States must stand by and empower the human rights advocates, victims, judges, prosecutors, union leaders, journalists and others who are the driving forces towards a more just and peaceful Colombia.

The Compass details seven sensible steps policymakers can take to create a just and effective Colombia policy.

1. Use U.S. Aid and Leverage for Human Rights and the Rule of Law

To address a human rights crisis that continues unabated and a chronic lack of political will to deal with it, the United States must use tougher diplomacy to encourage the Colombian government to strengthen human rights guarantees, protect human rights defenders, and bolster institutions needed to break with a history of impunity for abuses. Colombia’s judicial system is central to the rule of law and must receive strong support.

2. Actively Support Overtures for Peace

The United States cannot continue to bankroll a war without end and, as the civilian population in the countryside continues to endure immense suffering, should make peace a priority.

3. Support Expansion of the Government’s Civilian Presence in the Countryside

Militarily occupying territory is not the solution to Colombia’s problems. The United States should help Colombia strengthen its civilian government presence in rural zones to address lawlessness, poverty and inequality, the roots of the conflict.

4. Protect the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Refugees

The United States can help resolve Colombia’s massive humanitarian crisis by insisting on the dismantlement of paramilitary structures, supporting Colombia’s Constitutional Court rulings on IDPs, and increasing and improving aid to IDPs and refugees.

5. Protect the Rights of Afro-Colombian and Indigenous Communities

The United States must pay special attention to promoting ethnic minorities’ land rights and guarantee that U.S. aid projects are not carried out on land obtained by violence.

6. Ensure that Trade Policy Supports, Not Undermines, Policy Goals towards Colombia

The United States should insist upon labor rights advances, especially in reducing and prosecuting violence against trade unionists, prior to further consideration of the trade agreement. The United States must ensure that any trade agreement will not undermine U.S. policy goals, such as reducing farmers’ dependence on coca and ending the conflict.

7. Get Serious—and Smart—about Drug Policy

The United States is overdue for a major course correction in its drug control strategy, which has failed spectacularly in Colombia and the Andean region. The United States should end the inhumane and counterproductive aerial spraying program and invest seriously in rural development, including alternative development designed with affected communities. Drug enforcement should focus higher up on the distribution chain, disrupt money laundering schemes and apprehend violent traffickers. Access to high-quality drug treatment in the United States, which will cut demand, must be the centerpiece of U.S. drug policy.

“The next administration should use diplomatic pressure to hold Colombia to much higher standards on human rights, labor rights, and protection of the rule of law.”–Lisa Haugaard, Latin America Working Group Education Fund

“The United States must recognize the magnitude of the human rights crisis for Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities in Colombia, in which hundreds of thousands of people have lost their lands and livelihoods to violence.” –Gimena Sánchez-Garzoli, Washington Office on Latin America

“Nine years after the launch of Plan Colombia, the production of cocaine remains virtually unchanged. The United States simply cannot afford to continue to pursue this costly and failed counternarcotics policy. The next President must change course.” –Adam Isacson, Center for International Policy

“In the last decade, Colombia’s conflict has taken 20,000 more lives and displaced more than 2 million citizens. Now is the time to make renewed efforts for peace.” –Kelly Nicholls, U.S. Office on Colombia

For more information:
Lisa Haugaard, Latin America Working Group Education Fund, (202) 546-7010; lisah [at] lawg.org
Gimena Sánchez-Garzoli, Washington Office on Latin America, (202) 797-2171; gsanchez [at] wola.org
Adam Isacson, Center for International Policy, (202) 232-3317; isacson [at] ciponline.org
Kelly Nicholls, US Office on Colombia, (202) 232-8090; kelly [at] usofficeoncolombia.org