« Back to Accord

Review of Agreement: Chapultepec Peace Agreement

Implementations

Review of Agreement – 1992

COPAZ was established according to the Peace Agreements, but it did not initially play as important a role as envisioned in the agreements.¹

COPAZ appointed the Special Commission, and the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador appointed the Special Electoral Tribunal after delays. The Government was over three months late in promoting legislation to establish the FMLN as a political party.²

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.³

“Situation of human rights in El Salvador,” United Nations General Assembly (A/47/596), 13 November 1992.
“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (S/23999), May 26, 1992.
“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (1992.S/23999) May 26, 1992.

Review of Agreement – 1993

COPAZ worked to seek consensus among its constituent members on various measures related to the Peace Agreement, but met many disagreements over its mandate. It discussed the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission on the Truth, but moved very slowly and failed to come up with a unified proposal.¹

“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (993.S/25812), May 21, 1993.

Review of Agreement – 1994

COPAZ continued to operate, and conversations began of it becoming a peace foundation once its mandate was officially fulfilled.¹

COPAZ submitted recommendations for a several constitutional reforms to the Legislative Assembly. The recommendations included changes to the functions of the Supreme Court of Justice and protections for individual rights, and they were in line with the Commission on the Truth report. The Assembly passed some constitutional amendments, but did not fulfill the recommendations of COPAZ or the Commission on the Truth.²

“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (1994.S/1994/1000), August 26, 1994.
“Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador,” United Nations Security Council (1994.S/1994/561), May 11,1994.

Review of Agreement – 1995

According to the new timetable for implementation agreed upon on 19 May 1994, COPAZ was set to terminate on 30 April 1995, but it became clear that the Peace Accords would not be fulfilled by that date, and so COPAZ sought an extension on the grounds that its mandate was to ensure the complete implementation of the Peace Accords.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.

Review of Agreement – 1996

The mandate of COPAZ expired on 10 January 1996. The Government of El Salvador and the members of COPAZ viewed it as a success, with only a few aspects of the peace process left incomplete—notably the land transfer and rural re-settlement programs. Some of the former members of COPAZ went on to serve in non-governmental organizations, such as Fundapaz, which endeavored to fulfill a similar role as that of COPAZ.¹

“National peace commission closes as its work comes to an end,” BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, January 15, 1996 [Originally in La Prensa Grafica, January 11, 1996].