On 29 June, the Inter-American Human Rights Court (based in San José Costa Rica) ruled that the Peruvian state bore responsibility for the extra-judicial execution of a member of the MRTA (Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru) who had previously surrendered after the storming of the Japanese Embassy in Lima in 1997. The operation is known as ‘Chavín de Huántar’.

It was on 17 December 1996 that 14 MRTA militants took more than 600 hostages, having hijacked a reception in the ambassador’s residence. Most were released in the following hours, but 72 of the higher-ranking guests were kept captive in order to force the Fujimori government to free a number of jailed MRTA comrades, pay a large ransom, and provide the hostage-takers safe conduct to the Amazon region.

The government finally took the residence by force, having taken advantage of protracted negotiations to build an underground tunnel beneath it. All the members of the MRTA were killed and all the hostages except one were freed unharmed.

In its ruling, the Inter-American Court established that one of the MRTA members, Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez (aka “Tito”) was killed after he had surrendered and that he was therefore a protected person under international law. It thus backed up rulings in Peruvian courts in 2012 and 2013 that his was an extrajudicial killing for which the state was responsible and that therefore the state had a duty to investigate and prosecute those responsible. It further ruled that there was insufficient evidence in the cases of two other MRTA attackers, Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva and Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza.

The Court noted that states have a right to use violence to rescue hostages, but that they have a duty to respect the life and integrity of those no longer in combat. The Peruvian state had violated judicial guarantees for not having carried out investigations with the appropriate diligence and for having used the military justice system to address these cases.

The Court ordered that a serious and effective investigation should take place to identify and punish those responsible for the death of Cruz Sánchez, and that his brother be offered necessary psychological support. The state was ordered to pay the costs involved in the case.
http://cejil.org/comunicados/corte-interamericana-de-derechos-humanos-declaro-a-peru-responsable-por-ejecucion-extraj The case in full can be seen at http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/articulos/seriec_292_esp.pdf.

Human Rights organisations in Peru have celebrated this judgement as a victory. However, the government and much of the media have reacted with anger, interpreting it as a direct attack on the commandos who stormed the embassy and released the hostages. The supporters of Fujimori are particularly enraged, highlighting what they see as the courage and bravery of the commandos who took part in the operation.

While the Peruvian state has chosen not to challenge the Inter-American system of justice directly (as it has when other rulings have found against it), it has been forceful in its criticisms of the various NGOs that have pushed these trials and whose costs have now been covered, questioning the credibility of some of the witnesses involved. Prime among these has been the Asociación Pro-Derechos Humanos (Aprodeh).