Human Rights: Chapultepec Peace Agreement

Written by

« Back to Accord

Human Rights: Chapultepec Peace Agreement

Implementations

Human Rights – 1992

COPAZ and the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador approved the law establishing the Office of the National Counsel for the Defense of Human Rights. The Counsel was then appointed, but delayed in beginning operations due to financial shortages. When the Counsel began operating, it dealt with cases procedurally, but did not act on them.1

ONUSAL raised concerns about persistent anonymous death threats made against potential witnesses to unsolved violent deaths and the lack of adequate action taken by the Government to address them.2 From January to May 1992 especially, the ONUSAL Human Rights Division received dozens of complaints about arbitrary killings and deadly force perpetrated by persons with FAES escorts and former members of the civil defense. A number of attacks against and attempted murders of ex-combatants and organizations affiliated with the parties to the conflict were also reported. Human rights activists were notable subjects of death threats from clandestine groups, as well.3

The use of torture by police officers was confirmed in a few cases, and abuse of arrested persons was systematic, especially at the time of capture.4 The civil defense and territorial service apparatuses were not dismantled on schedule, and ONUSAL received hundreds of reports of unlawful, arbitrary and/or incommunicado detention by members of these institutions. Municipal police showed little respect for due process laws and detainee/prisoner rights, and the judicial system lacked sufficient capacity to investigate or protect against such violations.5 The penal system was fraught with systemic violations of the rights of prisoners and detainees. In March 1992, 4755 of the total 5286 persons held in penitentiaries and penal centers were still awaiting trial. A lack of judges and court personnel was a significant part of the problem, but more importantly, the penal code did not live up to the standards set by the international conventions El Salvador had ratified.6 Minors were detained together with adults, and the living conditions in prisons and detention centers were deplorable.7

The FAES unlawfully recruited members in over 100 cases in early 1992, and FMLN was found to have children under the age of 15 among its ranks. However, recruitment and membership violations in the armed forces of both sides gradually ceased after the signing of the Peace Agreement.8

In general, freedom of movement was restored and international humanitarian law was upheld after the cease-fire took effect. However, ONUSAL received a large number of complaints from both civilians and the Government of unlawful acts or threats of violence and land occupations perpetrated by the FMLN.9

Gender discrimination remained widespread, with systematic discrimination against women at all levels and in all locations. The leading cause of death among women was complications of pregnancy, due to inequitable access to medical care. Salvadorian women constantly faced domestic violence, street violence and sexual harassment.10

  1. “Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/23999), May 26, 1992; “Situation of human rights in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly (A/47/596), November 13, 1992.
  2. “Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/24833), November 23, 1992.
  3. “Situation of human rights in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly (A/47/596), November 13, 1992.
  4. “Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division,” United Nations Security Council (S/24375), August 12, 1992.
  5. United Nations General Assembly, (A/47/596).
  6. “Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of ONUSAL,” United Nations Security Council (S/24066), June 5, 1992).
  7. “Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division,” United Nations Security Council (S/24375), August 12, 1992.
  8. “Situation of human rights in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly (A/47/596), November 13, 1992.
  9. ibid.
  10. ibid.

Human Rights – 1993

The National Counsel for the Defense of Human Rights opened regional offices and established itself as an autonomous protector of the peace agreements and burgeoning democracy.1

On 20 May 1993, Salvadorian riot police opened fire on a group of disabled FMLN war veterans demonstrating in Sal Salvador. At least three persons were killed. It was marked as the worst outbreak of violence since the cease-fire took effect.2

ONUSAL saw the report of the Commission on the Truth as one of the most importation human rights developments during its mission. It was clear that it viewed the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth as mandatory for the parties to the conflict.3

Serious concerns persisted regarding the continued trend of violations of the right to life and the right to integrity of person during the mid-year months.4 At the end of October 1993, two FMLN leaders were assassinated, raising political tension further around the issue of extrajudicial killings.5 Of particular concern was the number of these cases that seemed to involved death squads committing murders and making threats of a political nature.6 UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and the Security Council pressed upon ONUSAL and the parties to the Peace Agreement to take decisive action to curb the continuing trend of political murders. A Joint Group consisting of representatives from the Government, the National Counsel for the Defense of Human Rights and the ONUSAL Human Rights Division formed to investigate politically motivated illegal armed groups.7 The Government also created the Inter-institutional Investigation Commission to respond to the many reports of extralegal executions, especially those of FMLN ex-combatants. ONUSAL still criticized the Government for its inability to guarantee proper criminal investigations and due process procedures.8

ONUSAL observed that the overall human rights situation improved at the end of the year, after several tenuous months during the middle months of the year. Concerns about politically motivated violence persisted, as details about the violent acts emerged. The total number of complaints deemed admissible by the Human Rights Division during 1993 was 1618, with the greatest proportions regarding violations of the right to life (23.3%), due process (22.7%) and personal freedom (22%). The persons most responsible (presumably) for the violations were members of the National Police (32.5%), the judiciary (19%) and persons unknown (15.1%).9

  1. “Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/25812), May 21, 1993; “Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador up to 30 April 1993,” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/47/968 S/26033), July 2, 1993.
  2. “Killings at demonstration,” Keesing’s Record of World Events Volume 39, El Salvador, p. 39456.
  3. “Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador up to 30 April 1993,” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/47/968 S/26033), July 2, 1993.
  4. ibid.
  5. “Letter Dated 3 November 1993 from the Secretary-General Addressed to the President of the Security Council,” United Nations Security Council (S/26689), November 3, 1993).
  6. “Further Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/26790), November 23, 1993.
  7. “Letter Dated 7 December 1993 from the Secretary-General Addressed to the President of the Security Council,” United Nations Security Council (S/26865), December 11, 1993).
  8. “Ninth report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL),” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/49/59 S/1994/47), January 18, 1994.
  9. “Tenth report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/49/116 S/1994/385), April 5, 1994.

Human Rights – 1994

The Office of the National Counsel for the Defense of Human Rights (NCDHR) released a report at the beginning of the year concluding that progress on human rights in El Salvador is hindered by contradictions. Instruments and institutions were forming, but international human rights norms were far from standardized and compliance was lacking in the country.1 Later in the year, the NCDHR joined with the National Counsel to establish a authentication apparatus for reports of human rights violations in the country.2

The overall human rights situation improved after the regression during the middle of 1993, evidenced by lower numbers of complaints to the Human Rights Division of ONUSAL. However, reports of the involvement of FAES and National Police personnel in criminal activity, ongoing organized crime and political violence, and the systemic deficiencies in the rule of law tempered the relative improvements and marred the reputation of the new Government. A survey conducted during March 1994 revealed that crime is of greatest concern among the public, with 25% of persons reporting being a victim of assault during the prior three months. ONUSAL contended that the main source of human rights abuses was impunity, which stems from a weak justice system. The Legislative Assembly passed some constitutional amendments to incorporate some, but not all, of the recommendations from the Human Rights Division and the Commission on the Truth.3

The recommendations from the Commission on the Truth regarding recognition and ratification of international human rights treaties and instruments went on unheeded.4

On 10 November 1994, David Fausto Merino Ramirez, FMLN leader, was murdered along with other former revolutionaries, in an apparently politically motivated attack.5

  1. “Tenth report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/49/116 S/1994/385), April 5, 1994.
  2. “Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/1994/1212), October 31, 1994.
  3. “Eleventh Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (1 March — 30 June 1994),” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/49/281 S/1994/886), July 28, 1994.
  4. United Nations Security Council, (S/1994/1212).
  5. “Thirteenth Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL),” United Nations Security Council / General Assembly (A/49/888 S/1995/281), April 18, 1995.

Human Rights – 1995

The general trend of improvement in human rights since 1993 continued into 1995. Disappearances ceased and murders of a political nature became rare. The Government’s enforcement institutions were improving on a similar trajectory, but still fell short of fulfilling all the recommendations from the Commission on the Truth.1 The office of the National Counsel for Human Rights elected a new ombudswoman in March 1995, and the profile of the Counsel rose thereafter.2

In its final report, the ONUSAL Human Rights Division reiterated that the primary source of human rights violations in the country was impunity. So long as the judiciary and National Civil Police continued to fall short of the ideals established by the Peace Accords and the Commission on the Truth Recommendations, impunity would persist.3

In compliance with the recommendations from the Commission on the Truth, on 30 March 1995, the Legislative Assembly ratified the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Government also formally recognized the authority of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.4

As of 6 October 1995, the Legislative Assembly had not approved most of the legal and constitutional reforms it was required to approve by the Commission on the Truth recommendations and the 18 May 1995 revised work plan. The deadline for these reforms was set for 31 October 1995, but the Legislative Assembly was on track to approve some of them no sooner than the end of November 1995, and others not before mid-1996.5

  1. “Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/1995/220), March 24, 1995.
  2. “The Situation in Central America: Procedures for the Establishment of a Firm and Lasting Peace and Progress in Fashioning a Region of Peace, Freedom, Democracy and Development,” United Nations General Assembly (A/50/517), October 6, 1995.
  3. “Thirteenth Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL),” United Nations Security Council / General Assembly (A/49/888 S/1995/281), April 18, 1995.
  4. ” Thirteenth Report of the Director of the Human Rights Division of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador (ONUSAL),” United Nations General Assembly / Security Council (A/49/888 S/1995/281), April 18, 1995.
  5. “The Situation in Central America: Procedures for the Establishment of a Firm and Lasting Peace and Progress in Fashioning a Region of Peace, Freedom, Democracy and Development,” United Nations General Assembly (A/50/517), October 6, 1995.

Human Rights – 1996

At the conclusion of ONUSAL’s mandate, UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali commented that the Government’s emergency actions to fight crime contradicted some components of the Peace Accords and set back improvements in human rights.1

  1. “International News, Associated Press Worldstream,” Associated Press, April 30, 1996.

Human Rights – 1997

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan proclaimed in 1997, “Massive human rights violations no longer occur [in El Salvador]. The systematic practice of forced disappearances, torture, the holding of prisoners incommunicado, acts of terrorism and summary and arbitrary executions on political grounds is a thing of the past.” The Government still had not ratified some important international treaties recommended by the Commission on the Truth, such as the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity. The budget of the National Counsel for the Defense of Human Rights was cut significantly, hindering its ability to fulfill the role given it by the Peace Agreements.1

Despite continued promises by the Government to improve the rule of law, rates of violent crime spiked, with 8,281 homicides—compared to an average of 6,330 annual deaths during the civil war.2

  1. “Assessment of the Peace Process in El Salvador: Report of the Secretary-General,” United Nations General Assembly (A/51/917), July 1, 1997, p. 5, para. 16.
  2. “C. America violence tarnishes peace,” Associated Press Online, June 13, 1998.

Human Rights – 1998

According to a report, the Salvadoran government’s human rights record improved somewhat in 1998. There was no report of political killings. However, there were two cases of suspected extrajudicial killings. There were no confirmed politically motivated disappearances. Torture, other cruel treatment and arbitrary arrests were constitutionally prohibited but the PNC continued to use excessive force and otherwise mistreat detainees as well as arbitrary arrests.1 Organized crimes were on the rise.

  1. “El Salvador Country Report on Human Rights Practices for 1998,” US State Department, accessed January 4, 2012, http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/1998_hrp_report/elsalvad.html.

Human Rights – 1999

According to the U.S. State Department Human Rights Report, the government of El Salvador had some problems on issues related to its human rights record. However, the there was some improvement in the government’s performance. It was reported that there were several extrajudicial killings by police, use of excessive police force, mistreatment, arbitrary detention etc. Nevertheless, the new Civilian National Police was said to be improving its procedures.1 The report also suggests high organized crime, which increased after the signing of the accord in 1992.

  1. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- El Salvador 1999,” U.S. State Department, Accessed January 4, 2012, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/1999/386.htm.

Human Rights – 2000

Organized crimes continued to rise and had some implication on human rights record of government of El Salvador. According to a report, the Salvadoran government’s human rights record improved somewhat in 2000. There was no report of political killings. However, there were two cases of suspected extrajudicial killings by police officers. There were no confirmed politically motivated disappearances. Torture, other cruel treatment and arbitrary arrests were constitutionally prohibited but the PNC continued to use excessive force and otherwise mistreat detainees as well as arbitrary arrests.1 According to the same report, impunity for the rich and powerful remained a problem.

  1. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- El Salvador 2000,” U.S. State Department, Accessed January 4, 2012, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2000/wha/768.htm.

Human Rights – 2001

Organized crimes continued to rise and had some implication on human rights record of government of El Salvador. According to a report, the Salvadoran government’s human rights record improved somewhat in 2001. There was no report of political killings. However, there were two cases of suspected extrajudicial killings by police officers. There were no confirmed politically motivated disappearances. Torture, other cruel treatment and arbitrary arrests were constitutionally prohibited but the PNC continued to use excessive force and otherwise mistreat detainees as well as arbitrary arrests.1 According to the same report, impunity for the rich and powerful remained a problem. Police kidnapped persons for profit.

2012: The Salvadoran government generally respected human rights, but there were some areas of violation. According to the same report, impunity for the rich and powerful remained a problem. Police kidnapped persons for profit. Gender related violence and discrimination remained a serious problem. Some police officers committed killings, and used excessive force and mistreated detainees. Prison conditions remained poor, and overcrowding was a continuing problem.2

  1. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- El Salvador 2001,” U.S. State Department, Accessed January 4, 2012, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2001/wha/8354.htm.
  2. “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- El Salvador 2002,” U.S. State Department, Accessed 4 January 2012, http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2002/18331.htm.