Former President Alberto Fujimori Cleared in Peru Sterilization Case

By Ellis Cortez
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

LIMA, Peru – Peruvian prosecutors have decided not to file criminal charges against former President Alberto Fujimori or any of his ministers over a 1990s sterilization program under which thousands of women say they were forcibly sterilized.

Two Peruvian women in file photo from 2000
Hundreds of mostly poor and indigenous women and men allege they were sterilized against their will. (Photo Courtesy of BBC News)

Prosecutor Marco Guzman said there were no crimes against humanity committed by Fujimori’s government and decided to close the case. Guzman found no evidence to support claims that hundreds of mostly poor and indigenous men and women were sterilized against their will. “The women would come to the clinic, agree to the procedure, and undergo sterilization. That was the regular, normal process,” he concluded.

Human rights groups do not agree with the decision and are saying they will appeal. They allege that sterilization was forced upon more than 2,000 women under Fujimori’s government in an attempt to reduce poverty by lowering the birthrate. The campaign had the backing of international donors including the United Nations Population Fund, Japan and the United States, as well as anti-abortion and feminist organizations.

Activists say that besides being forced, the sterilizations were often carried out in unsanitary conditions.

An independent congressional commission stated that the government of President Fujimori had sterilized 346,219 women and 24,535 men during his terms in office between 1990 and 2000. The Fujimori government has always maintained all operations were consensual.

Hundreds of people, some of them illiterate, said they were forced to undergo operations and not told they could have refused. Some women say they were deceived, threatened with jail, bribed with food parcels, and otherwise pressured into the operations to meet program quotas.

A Peruvian feminist organization, Demus, condemned the decision, saying in a statement: “The program was a public policy that promoted the sterilization of thousands of women in the country, especially in rural areas, who by deception and blackmail were deprived of their reproductive capacities.”

The original investigation into allegations of forced sterilization was archived in 2009, but prosecutors reopened the investigation again in 2011 at the urging of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

Fujimori, who led Peru from 1990 to 2000, is now in prison serving four concurrent sentences for corruption, authorizing death squads, and human rights abuses. The longest is 25 years.

For more information please see:

The Boston Globe – Fujimori cleared in Peru sterilization case – 26 January 2014

CNN – Peru will not prosecute former President over sterilization campaign – 25 January 2014

BBC – Peru closes forced sterilisation probe and clears ex-President Alberto Fujimori – 24 January 2014

Fox News –Peru’s Fujimori spared prosecution for 1990s sterilization program – 24 January 2014

Press Release: Magnitsky’s Mother Takes Legal Action Against Interior Ministry to Close Second Posthumous Prosecution of Her Son

Press Release
For Immediate Distribution

27 January 2014 – Sergei Magnitsky’s mother has taken a legal action against the Russian Interior Ministry to terminate the second posthumous case against her son. She has also called for an investigation of those officials who are responsible for the case falsification.

“This criminal case is based on a fictitious event, and therefore must be terminated, and there should be a proper investigation launched into those officials who have falsified the records and organized the second posthumous persecution of my son,” says Ms Magnitskaya in her statement.

Magnitsky’s mother believes that the second posthumous case accusing her son of complicity in the $230 million theft that he had uncovered is an attempt to pressure her into dropping her calls for justice.

“Unlawful acts of officials…cause me unjustified suffering and pain which I consider as a new attempt by investigators to force me to withdraw my calls for justice for my deceased son and for bringing to account those responsible for his unlawful prosecution and murder,” says Ms Magnitskaya.

The complaint by Ms Magnitskaya states that Interior Ministry Investigator Urzhumtsev who was the officer who launched the second posthumous Magnitsky case had a material conflict of interest, as he was a friend of Andrei Pavlov, the lawyer who took part in the collusive lawsuits in various courts which were then used to justify the fraudulent $230 million refund uncovered by Mr Magnitsky.

Ms Magnitskaya’s complaint says that Investigator Urzhumtsev was aware of Magnitsky’s testimonies which exposed those involved in the fraud against Hermitage and the $230 million theft, including Andrei Pavlov.

“The inclusion of false data in the criminal case records is an abuse of office, in this case wilful…A significant part in this falsification was performed by Investigator Urzhumtsev, an acquaintance of A.Pavlov… Investigator Urzhumtsev was aware from the materials of the criminal case …that my son during the stated period confronted the criminal group which perpetrated fraud against his client – the three Russian companies of the Hermitage Fund. He knew of my son’s testimonies from 5 June 2008 and 7 October 2008 in which he exposed the perpetrators and the co-conspirators of the theft,” says the statement.

The new criminal case was opened in secrect and kept from Magnitsky’s family.

“Serious violations of constitutional rights of my son who is deprived of anopportunity to defend himself due to his death in detention centre, his incrimination, in secrecy from his relatives, in committing a serious offence, doing so without issuing him a charge,  and without a valid court verdict in relation to him, is a clear ground to terminate the criminal case No 678540 which is based on a fictitious crime event,” said Ms Magnitskaya in her statement.

For further information, please see:

Law and Order in Russia

Ukrainian Standoff Escalates as Yanukovych Seeks to Avoid Possible Emergency State

By Ben Kopp
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe Desk

KYIV, Ukraine – Ukrainian opposition leaders scoffed at what has been deemed President Viktor Yanukovych’s moment of weakness in the recent months of tension. Meanwhile, leaders and protesters throughout Europe support dialogue between Ukraine’s government and the opposition.

Ukrainian protests spread, including a siege on the Justice Ministry. (Photo courtesy of Voice of Russia)

In November 2013, anti-government protests erupted in Ukraine; particularly, over President Viktor Yanukovych’s rejection of a deal that would have brought Ukraine and the European Union closer. In mid-January, tensions led to a number of fatalities, as police and protesters clashed. All three primary opposition leaders attended a funeral for Mikhail Zhiznevsky, a Belarussian national who was shot and killed at the height of the violence.

Activists occupied regional administrations in ten Ukrainian regions, where they protested against president-appointed governors. In four Ukrainian cities, thousands of activists laid siege to local government offices. Police broke up a rally in Zaporizhya with batons and stun grenades.

As protests spread into Eastern Ukraine, high tensions in Kyiv led to dozens of protesters seizing control over the Justice Ministry, smashing windows and erecting barricades. Ukraine said that it may issue a state of emergency if the situation at the Justice Ministry worsens.

On 25 January 2014, Yanukovych offered opposition leaders posts within the government, including offering Arseniy Yatsenyuk (Fatherland party) prime minister and Vitali Klitschko deputy prime minister. The next day, Ukrainian opposition leaders said the deal would not be enough to end the worst crisis since Ukraine gained independence.

In his offer, Yanukovych failed to address key demands, such as bringing forward presidential elections and releasing jailed opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko.

Klitschko, who is believed to have a personal rivalry with Yatsenyuk, said, “This was a poisoned offer by Yanukovych designed to split our opposition movement.”

However, opposition leaders have neither accepted nor expressly rejected any of Yanukovych’s proposals; but instead, stating that talks will continue. Feeling unprecedented pressure, Yanukovych’s office stated that Yanukovych is willing to consider constitutional amendments that would shift power and authority from himself to the prime minister.

Into the weekend, Europe urged dialogue within Ukraine. During his weekly Angelus prayer, Pope Francis expressed hope that “the search for common good may prevail in the hearts of all.” A crow and a seagull immediately attacked two doves released in hope of peace for Ukraine.

On 28 January 2014, Ukraine’s parliament will meet for a critical debate session. They are expected to debate key points of the crisis, including protest laws.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier described the situation as “not only tense but truly serious. The coming days could decide Ukraine’s path into the future.”

For a brighter day, Ukraine must hope that peace for its government and for its people is saved from assailants, both foreign and domestic.

For further information, please see:

Voice of Russia – Ukraine May Issue State of Emergency If Protesters Don’t Leave Justice Ministry – January 27, 2014

Associated Free Press –Ukraine Protests Spread as Opposition Snubs Compromise Offer – January 26, 2014

BBC News – Ukraine: President Yanukovych Blinks First over Protests – January 26, 2014

BBC News – Ukraine Protests ‘Spread’ into Russia-Influenced East – January 26, 2014

RadioFreeEurope RadioLiberty – Rallies Held Abroad for Ukraine – January 25, 2014

Impunity Watch – New Deaths Make Ukrainians Unsure How Long Tensions Must Continue – January 23, 2014