TOP MEXICAN DRUG TRAFFICKER KILLED: U.S. CLOSES BORDER CONSULATE

FBI Website photo of Nacho Coronel or Ignacio Coronel Villareal
FBI Website photo of "Nacho Coronel" or Ignacio Coronel Villareal

By Erica Laster                    Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MEXICO CITY, Mexico – In a raid on a drug trafficking house in a wealthy suburb of Guadalajara Thursday night, soldiers shot and killed Ignacio Coronel Villareal (Nacho Coronel), a top Mexican drug cartel leader.  His death comes the same day as the United States embassy in Mexico City announced the closure of the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, a city located across the border from El Paso, Texas.

The consulate will close beginning today and remain closed “until the security review is completed.”  The consulates’ closure comes amid rising concerns over border violence between the cities.  This past March, a vehicle containing a U.S. employee at the consulate, a Mexican citizen with ties to the consulate and the employees’ husband was gunned down, killing all three after leaving a children’s party.  Mexico and the United State’s bordering states have seen a rise in unchecked violence and death in the past 4 years.

Nacho Coronel was wanted in the U.S. with a $5 million reward offered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for any information leading to his arrest. A 12 count indictment by the U.S. Department of Justice revealed accusations that Nacho and 42 others imported almost 200 metric tons of cocaine and heroin into the U.S.  An estimated $5.8 billion in proceeds were returned to Mexico from drug sales in Canada and the U.S.  Known as the “King of Crystal,” the FBI believed that Coronel was “the forerunner in producing massive amounts of methamphetamine in clandestine laboratories in Mexico, then smuggling it into the U.S.”

Mexico based security consultant, Alberto Islas, told reporters that as the “most sophisticated drug dealer in terms of logistics and money laundering,” Nacho Coronel’s death would probably result in a momentary “dip” in supplies to the U.S.

Nacho’s right hand man, Francisco Quinonez, was also arrested by soldiers in Thursday night’s raid.  Quinonez alone accompanied Coronel to his mansion in the western city of Guadalajara.  General Ruiz Villegas told reporters that Coronel opened fire on military soldiers, wounding one and killing another in his attempt to escape.

While his death deals a heavy blow to his Sinaloa cartel, it signals a massive victory for Mexican President Felipe Calderon. Some weary Mexicans have balked at President Calderon’s policies. Many more have accused him of being allied with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, a fugitive since his escape from prison in 2000, and the previous leader of Sinaloa cartel.

In 2006, President Calderon sent approximately 45,000 soldiers to reclaim areas of the country heavily controlled by drug traffickers. More than half that number, a staggering 26,000, have died since then in drug-related violence.

Photo Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal

For More Information Please Visit:

Wall Street Journal Top Mexican Trafficker Killed In Raid – 30 July 2010

MSNBC US Consulate In Ciudad Juarez Closes For Security – 30 July 2010

Reuters U.S. Closes Consulate in Mexico’s Ciudad Juarez – 29 July 2010

[Campaign for International Justice] Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories: Accountability Must be Paramount as UN Considers Investigations on Gaza Conflict

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

PUBLIC STATEMENT

AI Index MDE 15/017/2010

26 July 2010

Israel/Occupied Palestinian Territories: Accountability must be paramount as UN considers investigations on Gaza conflict

Amnesty International has reiterated its urgent call for accountability for alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law committed by the parties to the conflict in Gaza and southern Israel as the UN Secretary-General prepares to assess domestic investigations.

Between 27 December 2008 and the 18 January 2009, around 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis were killed during the 22-day conflict in Gaza and southern Israel – three of the Israelis and the majority of the Palestinian fatalities were civilians. In September 2009 a UN-mandated Fact-Finding Mission led by Justice Richard Goldstone published its findings (the Goldstone Report) which concluded that both Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups had committed grave violations of international law, including war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the conflict. The UN General Assembly resolution of 2 November 2009 (A/Res/64/10) endorsed the Report of the Fact Finding Mission and, in line with the Report’s recommendations, called on the Israeli government and the Palestinian side to undertake “independent, credible” investigations in conformity with international standards into the serious violations reported by the Mission. The General Assembly also asked the UN Secretary-General to report back to it with an assessment of the Israeli and Palestinian investigations after three months. After an initial assessment on 4 February 2010, the General Assembly, in a second resolution passed on 26 February 2010, requested that the Secretary General evaluate the investigations again within a further five months.

As this five-month period draws to a close, Amnesty International continues to be concerned about the limited extent of the domestic investigations, which have so far failed to be conducted consistently with international law and standards requiring prompt, thorough, independent and impartial investigations. The organization is also concerned that neither of the parties have demonstrated a genuine commitment to ensure that if those investigations produce sufficient admissible evidence, each suspect will be prosecuted in a fair trial without the possibility of the death penalty and that full reparations will be provided to the victims. Amnesty International has repeatedly called for the establishment of an independent committee of experts to assist the Secretary General in his assessment of the domestic investigations. On 25 March 2010 the Human Rights Council established separately a Committee of Experts which will report to the Council in its 15thsession in September 2010.

If the respective parties fail to conduct investigations that meet international law and standards, Amnesty International considers that the international community will need to assume the responsibility to ensure justice, truth and full reparations to the victims. If so, one means to achieve this would be for the UN Security Council to refer the situation to the International Criminal Court for investigation.

A year and a half after the conflict in Gaza and southern Israel ended, the victims have yet to obtain justice, truth or full reparations; the perpetrators on both sides have yet to be held to account.

The international community must not fail in its duty to ensure that these objectives are achieved if the parties to the conflict show that they are unable or unwilling to achieve them.

Amnesty International continues to be concerned that the independence and impartiality of the Israeli investigations is severely compromised by the fact that all these investigations have been carried out by army commanders or by the military police. In addition, these inquiries are overseen by the Military Advocate General (MAG), whose office cannot be considered a disinterested party as it provided legal advice to Israeli forces on their choice of targets and tactics during the 22-day conflict.

The Israeli authorities have periodically released some, but only partial, information about their investigations. This lack of transparency has impeded independent scrutiny of these investigations. According to the Israeli authorities, criminal investigations by the military police were opened into 47 incidents. Around 100 other incidents involving alleged violations of the laws of war by the Israeli forces during its 22-day military offensive in Gaza however, were considered only in operational debriefings – which the Israeli military terms “command investigations”. The army commanders conducting these debriefings do not have the necessary expertise to investigate alleged crimes under international law, and cannot be considered independent. Also, problematically, these debriefings are confidential. If a commander should decide to refer an incident for criminal investigation, self-incriminatory testimony given by soldiers in the debriefing would not be admissible in court. Further, when the debriefings are closed without being referred for criminal investigation – as has been the case in the vast majority of cases thus far – it is not possible for independent experts to review the proceedings or the evidence behind the decision not to open a criminal investigation.

To date, just one case considered by the Israeli inquiries has yielded a criminal charge, trial and conviction. This relates to a case of looting in which an Israeli soldier stole a Palestinian’s credit card. Criminal charges have been filed in two additional cases which have yet to be concluded – one concerns the alleged use of a nine-year-old boy as a “human shield” by two Israeli soldiers and the other the killing of two women for which one Israeli soldier has been charged with manslaughter. According to the latest official update on investigations (published on 19 July by the Israeli government) the military police are still investigating allegations against Israeli forces relating to the al-Sammouni family, concerning not only a large number of civilian fatalities and injuries but also the denial of medical and humanitarian access to wounded family members.

The latest official update also states that the Military Advocate General decided in three additional incidents to employ disciplinary measures rather than take legal action against members of the Israeli military. These incidents include another case of a Palestinian civilian being used as a “human shield”; a missile strike on the Ibrahim al-Maqadma Mosque which resulted in a large number of civilian casualties; and the Israeli forces’ shelling on 15 January 2009 of the main compound of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in Gaza City in which hundreds of civilians were sheltering.

Some of the incidents the Israeli military has decided do not warrant criminal investigation are cases which appear to have been serious violations of international humanitarian law and which Amnesty International maintains require effective, independent investigation. These include Israeli attacks on UN facilities, civilian property and infrastructure, attacks on medical facilities and personnel, and incidents in which large numbers of civilians were killed and injured as a result of reckless conduct, disregard for civilian lives and consistent failure on the part of Israeli forces to distinguish between military targets and civilians and civilian objects.

Despite enduring concerns expressed by Amnesty International over Israel’s extensive use of white phosphorus in Gaza, the Israeli government’s January 2010 update contends that there are “no grounds to take disciplinary or other measures for the IDF’s [Israeli Defence Force] use of weapons containing phosphorous”. This is despite the fact that throughout Israel’s 22-day military operation in Gaza Israeli forces repeatedly fired artillery shells containing white phosphorus into densely populated residential areas, causing death and injuries to civilians. The July update reports that after the shelling of the UNRWA compound “the IDF immediately imposed revised restrictions on the use of smoke-screening munitions containing white phosphorous near sensitive sites (including the requirement of a several hundred meters buffer zone). These restrictions were in place through the remainder of the Gaza Operation.” But Amnesty International notes with concern that these restrictions failed to prevent white phosphorus shells causing further deaths and injuries to civilians in Gaza (including in an UNRWA school in Beit Lahiya, struck by white phosphorus shells on 17 January 2009).

In a potentially positive development, the July update states that Israel’s Chief of General Staff has “ordered the establishment of a clear doctrine and orders on the issue of various munitions which contain white phosphorous” and that “the IDF is in the process of establishing permanent restrictions on the use of munitions containing white phosphorus in urban areas.” The nature and extent of these restrictions are not clearly explained. Given the inadequacy of the restrictions the Israeli authorities say they implemented in the last few days of their military operation in Gaza in 2008/9, Amnesty International considers that they must immediately prohibit absolutely the use of such weapons in densely populated residential areas.

Other Israeli attacks which resulted in civilian injuries and deaths have been dismissed as “operational errors” and the soldiers involved have not been criminally charged or disciplined.

As regards the Palestinian side, the information available to Amnesty International indicates that the Hamas de facto administration has failed to mount any credible investigations into the alleged war crimes and other serious violations of international law committed by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Documents submitted to a UN official in Gaza on 2 February 2010 by the Ministry of Justice indicated that Hamas had: 1) established a 12-person governmental committee (headed by the Hamas de facto Minister of Justice) to monitor the implementation of the recommendations of the Goldstone Report; 2) established a three-person independent international committee of experts in international law to guarantee the transparency and impartiality of the steps taken by the government; 3) commissioned the public prosecutor in Gaza to investigate all alleged violations of international law reported to him. However, these documents focus on alleged violations by the Israeli military and fail to address adequately the firing of indiscriminate rockets by Palestinian armed groups into southern Israel which killed three civilians and injured others during the conflict.

The Goldstone Report found that “these attacks constitute indiscriminate attacks upon the civilian population of southern Israel and that, where there is no intended military target and the rockets and mortars are launched into a civilian population, they constitute a deliberate attack against a civilian population. These acts would constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity” (A/HRC/12/48, paragraph 108).

In respect to the firing of indiscriminate rockets and mortars, the response from Hamas stated: “All Palestinian armed groups have published declarations that they did not target civilians but rather that they targeted military targets but tried to avoid civilian targets”. This contradicts statements made by armed groups, including Hamas’ military wing, before and during the conflict in which they claimed responsibility for rocket attacks, which they stated were directed at civilian towns and which killed or injured civilians and damaged civilian homes.

Armed groups have an obligation to respect applicable international humanitarian law. The firing of indiscriminate rockets by Palestinian armed groups into Israel between 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009 killed three Israeli civilians and caused further civilian injuries and damage to civilian property. Whether these attacks were intended to hit military or civilian objects, the use of unguided projectiles which could not be directed at specific targets, placed the civilian population at risk and violated international humanitarian law.

Since February 2010, Amnesty International has received no further information that would indicate that Hamas is undertaking credible investigations into alleged violations by Palestinian actors during the conflict, or that there are any attempts by Hamas to charge and prosecute those responsible.

As the Palestinian Authority (PA) was not a party to the conflict in Gaza and southern Israel, Amnesty International has not called on them to conduct investigations. The PA did establish a Committee of Investigation in January 2010 however and made preliminary submissions to the UN Secretary General on 29 January 2010. On 12 July 2010, the Committee’s report was submitted to the UN.

Iran: Lawyer in Stoning Case Missing

By Elizabeth A. Conger
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

Mohammed Mostafei, the Attorney for Sakihned
Mohammad Mostafaei, the Attorney for Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani in 2009.

TEHERAN, Iran – Mohammad Mostafaei the human rights attorney who represented Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, the mother of two whose death by stoning sentence was stayed after international outcry over her case, has gone missing.  Amnesty International reported that Mostafaei was called in on Saturday for questioning at Teheran’s Evin prison and appears to have gone missing after his release.

Mostafaei’s collegues have said that they believe he is currently in hiding.

Iranian authorities have detained Mostafaei’s wife, Fereshteh Halimi, and brother-in-law, Farhad Halimi, in order to pressure Mostafaei to turn himself in. The two currently remain in detention and have not been allowed access to their lawyer, according to Amnesty International.

Mostafaei, an open critic of the Iranian judicial system, has defended many political prisoners, juvenile offenders, and individuals sentenced to death by stoning. His blog helped to generate much of the international outrage over Ashtiani’s stoning sentence. 

The last message posted on Mostafaei’s blog was on Friday July 23 when he said: “Today I was again contacted after being interrogated, I was summoned through a telephone call. I don’t know what the problem is this time. At any rate, tomorrow I have to go to the Evin prosecutor’s office. Maybe they will arrest me, I don’t know.”

Earlier this month Iranian officials said that Ashtiani would not be executed by stoning, but said that she could still face execution by hanging for her conviction of adultery.

Shadi Sadr, a well-known women’s rights advocate forced to leave Iran several months ago, worked with Mostafaei in the past on behalf of women sentenced to death by stoning.  She says that she believes the regime is reacting to the “international sensitivity” by placing pressure on Mostafaei.

Sadr added that the Iranian government’s reaction embodies the plight of human rights advocates in Iran in general.

She says that Mostafaei “worked within the framework of the laws of the Islamic republic, he never crossed the red lines set by the Islamic republic. This case just shows the increasing pressure on human rights activists and how red lines and limitations are becoming every day tighter and tighter.”

Malcolm Smart, Amnesty’s Middle East and North Africa director, said: “Mohammad Mostafaei is a thorn in the side of the Iranian authorities and we fear that he is being persecuted in an attempt to stop him carrying out his professional activities.”

According to the BBC, the Iranian government has also put pressure on another attorney involved in Ashtiani’s case, as well as Ashtiani’s son, who has fervently campaigned for her release.

For more information, please see:

AP – Amnesty: Lawyer in Iranian stoning case missing – 28 July 2010

BBC – Lawyer in Iran stoning case ‘missing’ – 28 July 2010

Radio Free Europe – Iranian Authorities Pressure Prominent Lawyer By Holding Family Members ‘Hostage’ – 27 July 2010

Independent Autopsy Called for Opposition Leader Murdered in Rwanda

President Kagame is slated to win Rwandas next presidential election.
President Kagame is slated to win Rwanda's next presidential election; Photo courtesy of Reuters

by Laura Hirahara
Impunity Watch Reporter
Africa Desk

Kigali, RWANDA– The Human Rights Watch (HRW) is calling for an independent autopsy of André Kagwa Rwisereka, whose body was found near his home in southern Rwanda July 14th, his head nearly decapitated just weeks before Rwanda’s next presidential election.  Rwisereka was vice president of the Democratic Green Party, the main opposition to current Rwandan president Paul Kagame.  The police have an unidentified suspect in custody and several different motives have been put forward as an explanation for Rwisereka’s murder.  While the police have stated that he may have been the target of a mugging or killed by an individual he was in a financial dispute with, Rwisereka’s colleagues in the Democratic Green Party say he had been receiving death threats since February because of his views opposing the current government.

HRW believes Rwisereka’s murder to be suspicious not only because of the timing of  but also beacuse this is the second controversial political figure to be murdered this month.  In June, Lt. General Faustin Kyumba Nyamwasa was wounded with a gunshot.  Within weeks, Jean-Leonard Rugambage, a journalist investigating the shooting of Nyamwasa was shot dead outside his home in Kigali.  Many have claimed all three incidents can be tied to Kagame’s government but the president, who is expected to win in the next election, adamantly denies these allegations, saying, “Nobody has asked the Rwandans … it’s as if they don’t matter in the eyes of the human rights people. It’s our own decisions in the end.”

For more information, please see;

Radio France Interntionale – First Day of Rwanda Political Campaign Opens with Funeral – 22 July 2010

CNN World – Independent Probe of Rwanda Politician’s Death Urged – 21 July 2010

BBC News – Rwanda: Call For Independent Autopsy of Murdered Critic – 21 July 2010

AFP – Independent Probe into Rwanda Murder Demanded – 21 July 2010

Chile Rejects Catholic Church’s Call To Pardon Human Rights Abusers

Anti-Pinochet Protestors in Chile (Photo Courtesy of Center for American Prgoress)
Anti-Pinochet Protesters in Chile (Photo Courtesy of Center for American Progress)

By Patrick Vanderpool
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

SANTIAGO, ChileThe Roman Catholic Church recently called on conservative Chilean President Sebastian Piñera to pardon long-serving human rights violators. 

Specifically, The Chilean Bishops’ Conference urged President Piñera to show clemency to prisoners who showed repentance from human rights violations that occurred during the Augusto Pinochet dictatorship.  Many of the longest-serving prisoners are elderly and ill, including ex-military officials who were directly responsible for abuses.  The proposed pardon would have pardoned 60 individuals.  The Church’s actions come while Chile is set to commemorate 200 years of Chilean independence.

The Church set specific parameters for those that they seek to be pardoned: individuals who are over 70 years old, have served at least half of their sentence, and who are ill.

The Pinochet regime, which lasted from 1973-1990, saw more than 3,000 Chileans killed at the military’s hands.  In a letter sent to President Piñera, the Bishops’ Conference stated that not all human rights violators shared equal responsibility.  The letter provoked a great deal of public outcry from family members representing those who were killed and tortured on Pinochet’s watch.  The victims’ families called the request a setback for justice and fairness.

Despite the effort, the Chilean President has refused to offer a pardon stating, “I have reached the conclusion that it would not be prudent or convenient in the current circumstances to promote a new law of general pardon.”

President Piñera was, however, receptive to the Church’s proposal for improving the country’s prison system, according to the President of the Chilean Bishops’ Conference.  The measures include improving facilities and building more jails to curb overpopulation.

While President Piñera closed the door to a broad sweeping pardon, he did leave the option open for the government to consider pardons on an individualized basis.  However, Piñera also said that no pardons would be considered for those who violated serious crimes, including murder and torture.

Mireya Garcia, vice president of the Group of Relatives of the Detainees and Disappeared, expressed concerns over this case-by-case evaluation.  Garcia fears that people who are sentenced under different categories, but who committed human rights violations, might be incorrectly pardoned.

José Miguel Vivanco, Americas Director for Human Rights Watch, applauded President Piñera’s decision.  Vivanco stated that the Church simply did not offer any compelling reason why these human rights abusers should be pardoned.

Merco Press – Piñera Rejects Bishops’ Plea To Pardon Military Involved In Human Rights Abuses – 26 July 2010

NPR – Chile Rejects Pardons Proposed By Catholic Church – 25 July 2010

New York Times – Chile Rejects Church Call To Pardon Officials – 25 July 2010