[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 27066-27067]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    MASSACRE AT SAN JOSE DE APARTADO

  Mr. LEAHY. I want to speak about a matter that I suspect few Senators 
are aware of, but which should concern each of us.
  On February 21, 2005, in the small Colombian community of San Jose de 
Apartado, eight people, including three children, were brutally 
murdered. Several of the bodies were mutilated and left to be eaten by 
wild animals.
  This, unfortunately, was not unusual, as some 150 people, 
overwhelmingly civilians caught in the midst of Colombia's conflict, 
have been killed by paramilitaries, rebels, and Colombian soldiers in 
that same community since 1997. None of those crimes has resulted in 
effective investigations or prosecutions. No one has been punished.
  That is an astonishing fact. Think of 150 murders, including 
massacres of groups of people, in a single rural community, and no one 
punished.
  This latest atrocity occurred in a remote area frequented by rebels 
and paramilitaries. As a result, the presence of the Colombian army has 
also grown significantly there. Yet the army, which was sent to that 
area to protect civilians from attacks by illegal armed groups, is now 
suspected by some of having committed this massacre.
  Residents of San Jose de Apartado have blamed the army, and 
international observers who went with community members to locate the 
bodies witnessed disturbing behavior by soldiers who reportedly laughed 
while body parts were being exhumed, who took pictures of themselves 
making victory signs, and who mishandled evidence from the massacre 
sites. There is also the possibility that paramilitaries acted in 
collusion with the army. And some have speculated that there were two 
separate groups of perpetrators, perhaps including the FARC, the 
Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the country's oldest rebel 
group.
  Even before an investigation began, top Colombian officials publicly 
declared that the FARC was responsible. The Minister of Defense, who 
has since resigned, insisted that the army could not have done this 
because on February 21 they were more than 2 days' walking distance 
from the crime scene. It was soon determined, however, that there were 
soldiers only half a day's walk away, and army helicopters had recently 
been seen in the vicinity.
  While it has not been proven who is responsible for this horrific 
crime, the government's rush to judgment was only its first mistake. 
That was quickly followed by the decision, against the wishes of the 
community, to send armed police officers into their midst. While I do 
not doubt the authority of Colombian police to enter that territory, it 
caused the majority of its inhabitants to flee their homes out of fear 
that the police would become a target of illegal groups and that the 
villagers could once again be harmed.
  In fact, such an attack took place on June 26, when three policemen 
were wounded in an attack by the FARC and community members were caught 
in the crossfire. Later, on July 18, an old man was found beaten to 
death. There were two more killings by the FARC, one in August and 
another in September, and verbal threats and acts of intimidation by 
soldiers and police officers towards members of the community have 
reportedly steadily increased. Then last month, there were three 
incidents in which armed para-
militaries and soldiers reportedly threatened members of the community 
and destroyed property. It appears that the community may be no safer 
today than it was on February 21.
  One of the consequences of the government's tactless approach to this 
and previous cases is that several witnesses from the community have 
refused to come forward and give testimony, and this has hindered the 
investigation. After a massacre of 6 members of this same community 5 
years ago when over 100 people gave testimony to judicial authorities, 
no one was convicted and no report on the investigation was ever 
issued. Convincing witnesses to come forward this time will require a 
degree of sensitivity by the government that has, to date, been sorely 
lacking.
  We are told by the Colombian Government that an investigation of the 
massacre is ongoing. That, unfortunately, is the story of most heinous 
crimes in Colombia. Investigations often continue without end, and 
often the perpetrators avoid punishment. I am concerned that this case 
may be no different.
  According to information I have received, neither the soldiers who 
were in the area at the time of the February 21 killings nor hospital 
workers who treated a girl who was wounded by soldiers there the 
previous day have been interviewed by investigators. I find this hard 
to believe, but if it is correct the government has much to answer for.
  For 5 years, the United States has provided significant military aid 
to Colombia despite ongoing concerns about human rights. Several months 
ago, the Secretary of State certified that the Colombian Government had 
met the human rights conditions in our law, and recommended the release 
of additional military aid. However, the report accompanying her 
certification also noted that ``[w]hile the human rights performance of 
many of the Army's units is improving, an exception is evidenced by 
continued accusations of human rights violations and

[[Page 27067]]

collusion with paramilitaries against the Army's 17th Brigade, which 
operates in northern Colombia. These reportedly include some 200 
allegations involving the peace community of San Jose de Apartado in 
2000-2001 and, most recently, of involvement in the killings near San 
Jose de Apartado in February 2005. . . As a result of these 
allegations, the United States has informed the Government of Colombia 
that it will not consider providing assistance to the 17th Brigade 
until all significant human rights allegations involving the unit have 
been credibly addressed.''
  While I might differ with the Secretary's decision to make the 
certification at the time she did, which coincidently occurred just 
hours before President Uribe's arrival at President Bush's ranch in 
Texas, I commend her decision to withhold aid to the 17th Brigade. It 
is noteworthy, however, that concerns about the 17th Brigade had been 
conveyed to the State Department well before this incident, including 
reports that its members were openly colluding with paramilitaries. Yet 
there is reason to believe that U.S. aid continued despite those 
reports.
  This case presents the Bush administration with an important 
challenge. It shows that despite billions of dollars from the United 
States and lofty rhetoric about human rights, the Colombian 
Government's initial reaction to this despicable crime was not 
appreciably different from what we saw years ago. They denied 
responsibility and blamed the victims even before an investigation 
began, and some of the key witnesses may not even have been interviewed 
8 months later.
  This is unfortunate because there has been progress on human rights 
under President Uribe's government. Parts of the country are noticeably 
safer. The government reports a significant decline in violent crime. 
But labor leaders and human rights defenders are still threatened and 
killed, the judicial system remains sluggish, and impunity is more the 
rule than the exception. Clearly, much more needs to be done to protect 
human rights.
  This case also presents a challenge for the Colombian Government to 
demonstrate, albeit belatedly, that it can respond with sympathy, with 
impartiality, and effectively to bring justice to the victims of a 
crime that epitomizes the worst of Colombia's conflict.
  I am also told that the Office of the United Nations High 
Commissioner for Human Rights conducted its own investigation of the 
massacre, but that the Colombian Government has not requested a copy of 
the report of that investigation. If this is correct I urge the 
government to do so immediately and to release as much of the report to 
the public as possible without compromising the investigation.
  This conflict has brought nothing but suffering to the Colombian 
people. It has caused the deaths of countless innocent civilians, 
uprooted millions from their homes, and perpetuated the trade in 
illegal drugs that has corrupted many sectors of society. The people of 
San Jose de Apartado, with the conflict raging around them, sought to 
insolate themselves from this danger by declaring themselves a peace 
community. That strategy failed, as one after another of their members 
was brutally murdered.
  Before February 21, I was not aware of the many tragedies this 
community had already suffered. While I do know, as a former 
prosecutor, that some crimes are harder to solve than others, in 
Colombia, as in so many countries, political will is often what really 
matters. It is imperative that this case not be added to the long list 
of unsolved, unpunished crimes in San Jose de Apartado, or become part 
of the history of impunity in Colombia. Who ever was responsible must 
be brought to justice.
  Mr. President, I also want to mention the demobilization of 
paramilitaries that is underway in Colombia. We all want these narco-
terrorist organizations to be dismantled, their commanders punished, 
their illegally acquired assets seized, and their victims compensated. 
The Colombian Government is asking the United States for millions of 
dollars to help finance the demobilization, and we want to help.
  I am concerned, however, because if the demobilization of the 
paramilitary unit located in the area of San Jose de Apartado is 
indicative of the way this process is unfolding, there are serious 
problems that need to be addressed. According to reports I have 
received, paramilitaries are engaging in the same threatening and 
violent behavior, they continue to collude with the army, and some have 
joined the army. Little has changed for the people in that area who 
continue to live in fear of losing their property and their lives. I 
hope the Colombian authorities who have been touting the success of the 
demobilization process will investigate these reports.

                          ____________________