OEA/Ser.L/V/II.61
Doc. 47 rev.1
October 5, 1983
Original: Spanish

CHAPTER II

 RIGHT TO LIFE1

A.          General Considerations

          1.          Article 43 of the Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala, now repealed, recognized that:

         The State guarantees as rights inherent to the human person: life, corporal integrity, dignity and personal safety.

          Although Article 54 established the death penalty, it was recognized that the same would be extraordinary in nature and that it could not be imposed based on presumptions, nor applied to women or minors, persons over seventy years of age, persons accused of political crimes, nor to accused persons whose extradition had been granted under that condition. At the same time it added that “against sentences imposing the death penalty all pertinent legal means, including cassation and pardon, will be admissible”. “The sentence will be executed after all remedies have been exhausted.”

          2.          As indicated in the previous chapter, Guatemala in ratifying the American Convention on Human Rights expressed a reservation with regard to paragraph 4 of Article 4 of the Convention adducing that the Constitution only excluded from the application of the death penalty political crimes but not politically related common crimes.

          3.          Prior to the Government of General Ríos Montt, Guatemalan legislation reserved the death penalty for crimes of extreme gravity.2 With his assumption of power and the creation of the Courts of Special Jurisdiction, a number of crimes that the Penal Code punished with prison terms became punishable by death. As a matter of fact, in accordance with Article 4 of Decree Law 46-82 of July 1^st, 1982 which created the Courts of Special Jurisdiction, in the future, those responsible for the following crimes will be punished with the death penalty:

Article 201 (kidnapping or abduction), 283 (aggravated arson), 286 (disabling of defenses), 287 (fabrication or possession of explosive materials), 289 (railroad disaster), 290 (attempt against other means of transportation), 294 (attempts against the safety of public utilities), 299 (piracy), 300 (air piracy), 302 (poisoning of water or foods or medicinal substances), 359 (treason by a Guatemalan National), 360 (attempts against the integrity or independence of the State), 361 (treason by a foreign resident), 376 (genocide), 391 (terrorism), 401 (cache of arms or ammunition), 404 (traffic in explosives).

          4.          Beginning on March 23, 1982, the violence which characterized Guatemala during recent years and which, as the IACHR pointed out in its first report, translated into an excessively high number of lost lives, began to diminish in certain aspects, although in others, as it will later be seen, that violence has acquired new manifestations.

          5.          In that sense, when studying the right to life under the Government of General Efrain Ríos Montt, the Commission feels that it is necessary to distinguish the situation that has developed in urban centers from that which developed in the rural areas. Due to its particular importance, the Commission will deal with the Courts of Special Jurisdiction in a detailed manner.

          6.          The Commission must point out that the recommendation from its previous report,--made again to the Government of General Ríos Montt as one of its “Preliminary Recommendations” upon conclusion of its on-site observation—of investigating and punishing with the full force of the law those responsible for the illegal executions and disappearances, not only has not been complied with, but the authors of those deaths were protected by the amnesty decreed by General Ríos Montt, as indicated in Chapter I, letter H.

B.          Violence in Urban Centers

          1.          In its previous report, the IACHR indicated that the frightening threats, including the publishing of lists containing the names of persons sentenced to death by the clashing groups and factions; the kidnappings and arbitrary arrests with subsequent disappearances; the uncovering of clandestine cemeteries; the innumerable attempts on persons and the daily appearance, throughout the country, of mutilated bodies with signs of having suffered brutal tortures before being machine gunned to death, had created in Guatemala a situation where total disregard for human life predominated.3

          2.          The Commission has no doubt that one of General Ríos Montt's primary objectives was to end that alarming situation. He so stated it during the meeting with the Commission, when on several occasions he said to the members of the Commission that “you will not see any more bodies on the streets,” indicating that his Government controlled the public order and would not tolerate that type of crime.

          3.          To that end, the Government had announced the suppression of paramilitary groups, which in the past brought a decentralization of violence, now trying to give the Army and the Police the monopoly in the use of force. With the dismantling of those paramilitary groups, which primarily operated in urban areas, violence in Guatemala City and the other main urban areas has diminished considerably.

          4.          According to the information and testimony received by the Commission, the number of kidnappings, disappearances and assassinations had been considerably reduced beginning on March 23, 1982, when the Army took effective control, patrolling the streets of Guatemala City and major cities in the country 24 hours a day. For that reason, the Commission has sound basis to presume that in those cases of kidnappings and subsequent disappearances there was participation by the armed agents of the State.4

          5.          The Commission heard credible testimonies on the reduction of violent deaths, as, for example by Dr. Abel Giron Ortiz, Chief of the Forensic Medicine Service of the Department of Guatemala. Dr. Giron Ortiz supported his testimony with statistical data according to which, beginning on March 23, 1982, there had been a considerable reduction in violent deaths in the capital city of the Republic. Dr. Giron Ortiz added that, during 1981 and until March of 1982, there were between 230 and 250 autopsies done a month, numbers which began to significantly diminish from April of 1982 on, to the point that the number of autopsies done during the month of the interview did not reach 200.5

          6.          The Commission considers that the number of autopsies done is an element of proof of relative validity because, in many cases—particularly in the rural areas—the bodies of persons who have suffered a violent death do not turn up immediately or the autopsy is simply not done. Nevertheless, the Commission also feels that the numbers provided, together with other facts that the Commission has been able to gather, allows it to conclude that, at least in the capital of Guatemala, violent deaths have diminished beginning in March of 1982.6

          7.          Although the Commission recognized that the population of Guatemala City and the major departmental capitals now enjoy more protection with respect to the right to life, it, at the same time believes that violence has not disappeared and that, to a significant degree, what has occurred is that there has been a change in the strategy of terror in terms of methods or systems used. In effect as we will see, indiscriminate killings, the death squadrons, the publication of lists of persons sentenced to death by the paramilitary groups, the assassinations of community leaders that existed before the coup were replaced by the Courts of Special Jurisdiction which functioned in secret and were empowered to apply the death penalty.

C.          Executions decreed by the Court of Special Jurisdiction

          1.          The Commission feels that on this subject two aspects must be considered: the large number of crimes punishable by the death penalty—which will be the subject of the following paragraphs—and the composition, functioning and characteristics of the Courts of Special Jurisdiction, which will be covered in Chapter IV.

          2.          The IACHR had knowledge of the activities of the Courts of Special Jurisdiction even before initiating its on-site observation in Guatemala. In effect, at 5:30 am., on September 18, 1982, while the IACHR was holding its 57^th session in San José, Costa Rica, it was informed that the Courts had sentenced to death Messrs. Julio César Vásquez Juárez, Julio Hernández Perdomo, Marcelino Marroquín and Jaime de la Rosa Rodríguez. The IACHR, through its Acting President, Lic. César Sepúlveda, embarked, via telephonic communications, on an intense effort to have the execution of the sentence halted. His efforts were in vain and it was impossible to locate a person with sufficient authority to attend to the request. The sentence was executed at 6:00 am. On September 18, 1982, 3 days prior to the arrival in Guatemala of the IACHR to initiate its on-site observation of that country.

          3.          The death of those four persons at the hands of a firing squad of the regular army of Guatemala, carrying out a sentence imposed by the Court of Special Jurisdiction—which functioned in secret, without anyone's knowledge of its composition, location or how the proceedings were conducted—produced in Guatemala, as the Commission later confirmed, a profound consternation reviving in vast sectors of the population a feeling of uncertainty and insecurity.

          4.          On the same day of its arrival in Guatemala, the Commission expressed to President Ríos Montt its preoccupation with the functioning of the Courts of Special Jurisdiction and the latest killings by firing squads. According to notes taken by the IACHR Secretariat, the actual words of General Ríos Montt's response were:

They are not the last ones (the shootings by firing squads). They are the first ones. Previously, the bodies of persons executed turned up on the streets. Each person killed whomever he wanted to kill. The courts did not impart justice. In seeing that no justice was done, each person killed on his own. In assuming the Presidency, I assumed responsibility for the trials. It is to set legal precedents.

Further on, President Ríos Montt added:

I am the one who makes the laws. I guarantee the people a just use of force. Instead of bodies on the streets, we are going to shoot those committing crimes. I am President, although, de facto; but I say that I am a butler, because now, my job is to clean the house…

          During its stay in the Republic of Guatemala, the Commission reiterated to the different government authorities with whom it had the opportunity to meet, its deep concern regarding the practice of those executions, urging, at all times, the elimination of the death penalty and the suspension of executions resulting from trials entrusted to the Courts of Special Jurisdiction, whose procedural mechanisms it tried to learn.

          6.          Upon conclusion of the on-site observation, the Commission forwarded to the Government of Guatemala a document containing Preliminary Recommendations,7 which, due to their urgency and importance, it requested the Government of Guatemala to put into practice immediately and where, among others, it particularly exhorted the Government to suspend the execution of death sentences and to adjust the functioning of the Courts of Special Jurisdiction to the due process norms contained in the American Convention on Human Rights.

          7.          As a consequence of these recommendations, the Government of Guatemala, with respect to the executions, sent a cable communication to the Commission advising that, in view of the Commission's recommendations, the Government of Guatemala had decided to suspend the executions sine die. In his communications dated October 26, 1982, addressed to the Executive Secretary of the Commission, the Minister of Foreign Affairs states:

IT IS MY PLEASURE TO INFORM YOU THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC, GENERAL JOSÉ EFRAIN RÍOS MONTT, HAS ORDERED THE SUSPENSION SINE DIE OF THE EXECUTIONS OF PERSONS CONVICTED BY THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION WHILE THE JUDICIAL PROCESS IS BROADENED TO ESTABLISH THE APPELLATE PROCEDURES THAT MAY BE USED BY THE CONVICT AND THUS PROVIDE FOR HIS BETTER DEFENSE, IN OBSERVANCE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE ON THE SUBJECT BY THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS IN ITS RECENT VISIT TO GUATEMALA. ACCEPT YOUR EXCELLENCY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY THE RENEWED ASSURANCES OF MY HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS8

          8.          For that reason, when the Commission thought that there would not be any more deaths by firing squads, it was with astonishment that on January 24, 1983, it received several complaints according to which another four persons would be shot to death in the following days as a result of sentences handed down by Courts of Special Jurisdiction and in which the complainants alleged a number of irregularities.

          9.          On that same day, the Commission opened a case under number 9038 and rushed the following telegraph message to the Government of Guatemala:

HIS EXCELLENCY EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

GUATEMALA CITY, GUATEMALA

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS HAS RECEIVED FOLLOWING COMPLAINT. “WALTER MARROQUIN, SERGIO MARROQUIN, HECTOR HAROLDO MORALES LOPEZ AND MARCO A. GONZÁLEZ, ALLEGEDLY MEMBERS OF THE CLANDESTINE ORGANIZATION POOR PEOPLE'S GUERRILLA ARMY (EGP) WOULD BE EXECUTED NEXT FRIDAY JANUARY THE 28, IF THE DEATH SENTENCE THAT THE EMERGENCY COURTS MAY HAVE IMPOSED ON THEM AS THE PRESUMED AUTHORS OF THE KIDNAPPING OF MISS SILVIA JIMÉNEZ DE LA PEÑA WERE TO BE CONFIRMED. COMPLAINT ALSO STATED THAT NONE OF THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO BE REPRESENTED AND DEFENDED BY COUNSEL CHOSEN BY THEIR RELATIVES NOR HAVE THEY BEEN ALLOWED TO INTRODUCE PROOF OF THEIR INNOCENCE BEFORE THE COURTS HEARING THIS CASE. IN THE APPEAL GRANTED, COUNSEL HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO LEARN THE SITUATION WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCEEDINGS NOR HAVE THEY BEEN GRANTED ACCESS TO DEFEND THEIR CLIENTS, WHO ARE CLOSE TO BEING SENTENCED TO DEATH DESPITE NOT HAVING BEEN ALLOWED THE GUARANTEES OF DUE PROCESS, DEEPLY CONCERNED BY THE TENOR OF THE PRECEDING COMPLAINT, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, WITHOUT PREJUDGING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE SAME, TAKES THE LIBERTY OF FORWARDING IT TO THE ENLIGHTENED GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA, SO THAT IT MAY INFORM AS TO THE EXTENT OF THE SAME, AND KINDLY REQUEST TO CONVEY TO HIS EXCELLENCY GENERAL EFRAIN RÍOS MONTT, THAT IN THE EVENT THE COURT OF APPEALS CONFIRMS THE DEATH SENTENCE, THE SAME BE COMMUTED.

WE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS TO YOUR EXCELLENCY OUR ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

MARCO G. MONROY CABRA EDMUNDO VARGAS CARREÑO

CHAIRMAN EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

          10.          In response, the Government of Guatemala sent the Commission the following cable:

MR. EDMUNDO VARGAS CARREÑO

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

I MAKE REFERENCE TO YOUR MESSAGE OF THE 25^TH OF THE PRESENT MONTH RELATING TO IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY BY COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION TO HECTOR HAROLDO MORALES LOPEZ, WALTER VINICIO MARROQUIN GONZÁLEZ, SERGIO MARROQUIN GONZÁLEZ AND MARCO A. GONZÁLEZ.

IN THAT RESPECT I BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT IN CONSTITUTIONS OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA AND PENAL CODE GOVERNING US FOR MANY YEARS THE DEATH PENALTY IS IMPOSED AS MAXIMUM SENTENCE, FOR THAT REASON WHEN THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA RATIFIED AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EXPRESSED SPECIFIC RESERVATION WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION OF THAT PENALTY TAKING INTO ACCOUT THAT IN GUATEMALA IT IS APPLIED AFTER INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS WITH THE GUARANTEES OF DEFENSE AND PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED BY LAW, LET ME CLARIFY THAT THE DEATH PENALTY IS NOT APPLIED TO WOMEN, MINORS NOR BASED ON PRESUMPTIONS, FULL PROOF BEING INDISPENSABLE, PERHAPS A NEW CONSTITUTION IN FORCE IN GUATEMALA IN THE FUTURE MAY CHANGE THIS LEGAL SITUATION BUT FOR NOW, COURTS ARE REQUIRED IN EXTREME CASES PROVEN, TO APPLY DEATH PENALTY FOR THE SAKE OF JUSTICE. IN SPITE OF THE STATED POSITION ABOVE, I HAVE FORWARDED YOUR MESSAGE AS WELL AS THAT FROM OTHER INSTITUTIONS AND PERSONALITIES WHICH HAVE MADE A SIMILAR REQUEST ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS. IN CONCLUDING, LET ME REITERATE TO YOU THAT IT WILL BE COMPETENT COURTS THE ONES DETERMINING THE APPLICATION OF COMMUTATION OF THAT SENTENCE. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION I AM FORWARDING INSTRUMENT OF RATIFICATION GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA TO AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, SIGNED APRIL 24^TH, 1978, WHICH CONTAINS RESERVATION MENTIONED ABOVE.

KJELL EUGENIO LAUGERUD GARCÍA

PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA

WHEREAS:

THE HONORABLE CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC, BY DECREE NUMBER 6-78, ISSUED THE 30^TH OF MARCH OF 1978, HAS GIVEN ITS APPROVAL TO THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, SIGNED IN SAN JOSÉ DE COSTA RICA, THE 22^ND OF NOVEMBER OF 1969, BEING THE DUTY OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH TO FORMULATE THE RESERVATIONS IT DEEMS APPROPRIATE TO SAFEGUARD THE LEGAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTRY.

NOW THEREFORE:

BY THE POWERS BESTOWED UPON ME BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC I RATIFY THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS WITH THE FOLLOWING RESERVATION:

THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA RATIFIES THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, SIGNED IN SAN JOSE DE COSTA RICA, THE 22ND OF NOVEMBER OF 1969, EXPRESSING ITS RESERVATION WITH RESPECT TO ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 4, OF THE SAME, SINCE THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA, IN ARTICLE 54, ONLY EXCLUDES FROM THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY POLITICAL CRIMES BUT NOT COMMON CRIMES RELATED THERETO.

AND I ORDER THAT IT BE PUBLISHED SO THAT IT BE OBSERVED AS A LAW OF THE REPUBLIC.

IN FAITH OF WHICH I SIGN THE PRESENT INSTRUMENT OF RATIFICATION, AUTHORIZED WITH THE MAXIMUM SEAL OF THE REPUBLIC AND ENDORSED BY THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, IN THE CITY OF GUATEMALA, ON THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY EIGHT.

KJELL EUGENIO LAUGERUD GARCÍA

PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA

THE MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

ADOLFO MOLINA ORANTES

SINCERELY

EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

          11.          Deeply concerned by the obvious intention of carrying out, at all costs, the alleged firing squad executions ordered by the Court of Special Jurisdiction and the erroneous interpretation the Government was giving the reservation expressed at the time of the ratification of the American Convention, on January 26, 1983, the Commission forwarded a new message to the Government of Guatemala requesting the commutation of the sentence and whose text reads as follows:

HIS EXCELLENCY

DR. EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

GUATEMALA (GUATEMALA)

I HAVE THE HONOR OF ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF KIND TELEX FROM YOUR EXCELLENCY DATED THE 25TH OF THE MONTH IN COURSE BY WHICH YOU INFORM THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPOSITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY BY COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION, IN CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA AND PENAL CODE GOVERNING FOR MANY YEARS, THE DEATH PENALTY IS IMPOSED AS MAXIMUM SENTENCE, REASON WHY WHEN THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA RATIFIED AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS EXPRESSED SPECIFIC RESERVATION WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION OF SAID PENALTY, TRANSCRIBING, IMMEDIATELY AFTER, THE TEXT OF THE INSTRUMENT OF RATIFICATION SIGNED APRIL 27^TH, 1978.

FOR THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS I AM GRATEFUL FOR THE CONTENT OF YOUR CABLE COMMUNICATION INFORMING HAVING TRANSMITTED MESSAGE FROM THIS ORGANIZATION AS WELL AS THAT OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS AND PERSONALITIES WHICH HAVE MADE A SIMILAR REQUEST FOR THE COMMUTATION OF THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH SENTENCE TO HECTOR HAROLDO MORALES LÓPEZ, WALTER VINICIO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ, SERGIO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ AND MARCO A. GONZÁLEZ, EFFORTS INSPIRED ON HUMANITARIAN SENTIMENTS AND ALSO PROTECTED IN THE SAME CONSTITUTIONAL TEXT CITED BY YOUR EXCELLENCY.

WE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS TO YOUR EXCELLENCY THE RENEWED ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

MARCO G. MONROY CABRA EDUARDO VARGAS CARREÑO

CHAIRMAN EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

          12.          Later, the Commission received new complaints which stated that in addition to the four persons indicated, the following persons had also been sentenced to death by the Courts of Special Jurisdiction; Pedro Roxon Tepec, Carlos Subuyug, Edgar Daniel Aldana, Alfonso Bonilla Chacon, Fernando Contreras y Contreras and Eleobardo Alvarez.

          13.          Extremely concerned by the new information and by the lack of response to the cable communications and telephonic efforts made by the Executive Secretary, under instructions of the Commission, with the Minister of Foreign Affairs in which the Executive Secretary reminded the Minister that the imposition of the death penalty to crimes which did not carry that penalty at the time Guatemala ratified the American Convention on Human Rights contradicted Article 4, paragraph 2, of that instrument, the Commission decided to send a new message on February 9, which read as follows:

HIS EXCELLENCY

DR. EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

GUATEMALA, GUATEMALA

I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF REFERRING TO YOUR KIND CABLE COMMUNICATION DATED JANUARY 26^TH, 1983, WITH RELATION TO THE ANNOUNCED APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY BY COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION TO WALTER AND SERGIO MARROQUÍN, HECTOR MORALES, MARCO GONZÁLEZ, PEDRO ROXON TEPEC, CARLOS SUBUYUG, EDGAR DANIEL ALDANA, ALFONSO BONILLA CHACÓN, FERNANDO CONTRERAS Y CONTRERAS AND ELEOBARDO ALVAREZ, IN RESPONSE AND BROADENING LAST INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS CABLEGRAM, IT BEHOOVES ME TO INFORM YOU THAT THE IACHR FINDS THAT THE IMPOSITION OF SAID PENALTY OPENLY CONTRADICTS THE LAST PART OF PARAGRAPH 2, ARTICLE 4 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO WHICH GUATEMALA EXPRESSED NO RESERVATION AT THE TIME OF RATIFICATION NOR AT ANY OTHER TIME AND WHICH STATES:

NOR ITS APPLICATION (THE DEATH PENALTY) BE EXTENDED TO CRIMES TO WHICH IS NOT CURRENTLY APPLIED.

IN EFFECT, NONE OF THE CRIMES COVERED IN THE ARTICLES OF THE PENAL CODE MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 4 OF LAW DECREE 46082 ORIGINATOR OF THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION AND WHICH AUTHORIZES THE PUNISHMENT9 AND CONSIDERING THAT ARTICLE 7 OF THE FUNDAMENTAL STATUTE OF GOVERNMENT CURRENTLY GOVERNING GUATEMALA STATES: “GUATEMALA, AS PART OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, WILL FULLY COMPLY WITH ITS INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS, ABIDING, IN ITS RELATIONS WITH THE OTHER STATES, BY THE RULES OF THIS STATUTE OF GOVERNMENT, BY INTERNATIONAL TREATIES AND BY THE RULES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ACCEPTED BY GUATEMALA”, AND HAVING GUATEMALA ACCEPTED WITHOUT RESERVATIONS IN RATIFYING THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, THAT IN THE FUTURE, THE IMPOSITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY WOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO CRIMES WHICH DID NOT CARRY SUCH PENALTY AT THE TIME OF RATIFICATION, THE COMMISSION URGES YOUR EXCELLENCY'S GOVERNMENT THAT IN OBSERVANCE OF ARTICLE 4, PARAGRAPH 2, OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED CONVENTION IT RESCIND THE DEATH SENTENCES IMPOSED BY THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION AND AFTERWARDS MODIFY ARTICLE 4 OF LAW DECREE 46-82.

WE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS TO YOUR EXCELLENCY THE RENEWED ASSURANCES OF OUR HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

MARCO GERARDO MONROY CABRA         EDMUNDO VARGAS CARREÑO

CHAIRMAN                                        EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

          14.          The Commission received no response to that communication. On the contrary, in the early morning of March 3, 1983, with only a few hours of advance notice, and several days before the arrival of Pope John Paul II in Guatemala as part of his historic visit to Central America, the shooting by firing squad of Messrs. Walter Vinicio Marroquín González, Sergio Roberto Marroquín González, Héctor Morales López, Carlos Subuyug Cuc, Pedro Raxon Tepet and Marco Antonio González, took place in spite of all the efforts made to prevent those executions, including those undertaken by the Pope himself through the Papal Nuncio in Guatemala.

          15.          On the same day the Government of Guatemala released the following statement:

         THIS MORNING SIX PERSONS TRIED FOR VERY SERIOUS CRIMES AND SENTENCED TO DEATH ON TWO INSTANCES BY COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION AFTER THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE DENIED THE APPEAL FOR AMPARO FILLED BY THE ACCUSED, WERE SHOT TO DEATH.

         GUATEMALAN LEGISLATION CONTEMPLATES THE DEATH PENALTY ONLY FOR SERIOUS CRIMES PRECISELY DEFINED IN OUR PENAL (CRIMINAL) SYSTEM, AND IT IS APPLIED IN THOSE CASES WHERE THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED IS FULLY PROVEN IN THE CORRESPONDING PROCESSES.

         TRIALS CONDUCTED BY THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION OBSERVE ALL THE GUARANTEES OF DUE PROCESS, PARTICULARLY THE RIGHT TO A DEFENSE, SINCE THE ACCUSED ARE ASSISTED BY DEFENSE COUNSEL FROM THE MOMENT OF THEIR INTERROGATION.

         THE VARIOUS CRIMINAL ACTS COMMITTED BY THE ACCUSED TYPIFY THE CRIME OF TERRORISM WHICH IS CONSIDERED A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY AND FOR THAT REASON, REPUDIATED BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY.

         THREE OF THEM, THE ACCUSED, BROTHERS WALTER VINICIO AND SERGIO ROBERTO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ AND HÉCTOR MORALES LÓPEZ, WERE FOUND GUILTY OF KIDNAPPING, EXTORSION, AND OF HAVING INJURED THEIR VICTIM, MRS. SILVIA XIMENA DE LA PEÑA FRATTA DE LÓPEZ, WHOSE FAMILY WAS FORCED TO PAY RANSOM MONEY TO OBTAIN HER FREEDOM. AFTERWARDS, THE ACCUSED, TRIED TO EXACT ANOTHER Q.50,000.00 (US$50,000) FROM THE FAMILY AND THEIR CAPTURE WAS EFFECTED WHEN THEY WERE RECEIVING THE EXTORSION PAYMENT. ALL THREE WERE RECOGNIZED BY THE VICTIM IN A LINE UP OF CONVICTS. CARLOS SUBUYUG CUC, PEDRO ROXON TEPET AND MARCO ANTONIO GONZÁLEZ, WERE FOUND GUILTY OF TERRORISM AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES, SHAMELESSLY CONFESSING, FULLY AND FREELY, AND BOASTING OF HAVING COMMITTED THE CRIMES OF TERRORISM THEY WERE CHARGED WITH.

         THE DEATH PENALTY HAS EXISTED IN GUATEMALAN LEGISLATION FOR MORE THAN 50 YEARS AND IS APPLICABLE TO SERIOUS CRIMES COMMITTED NOW WHEN THE COUNTRY IS UNDER A STATE OF SIEGE AND THE PUBLIC ORDER LAW IS IN FORCE, WHICH IS JURIDICAL NECESSITY TO FIGHT SUBVERSION AND COMMON CRIMINALS WHO, LATELY, HAVE PLACED IN PERIL THE SAFETY AND STABILITY OF THE FAMILY, SOCIETY AND STATE ITSELF.

         THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE, ACTING AS COURT OF AMPARO, FULLY ANALYZED THE PROCEEDINGS INSTITUTED TO SEE IF, IN THEM, ALL THE RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED HAD BEEN GUARANTEED. AFTER EXAMINING THEM IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF ANY RULES OF LAW AND, CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPEAL FOR AMPARO SUBMITTED BY THE ACCUSED'S DEFENSE LAWYERS WAS DENIED.

         THE APPEAL FOR AMPARO IS AN INSTRUMENT OF LEGAL CONTROL WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO GUARANTEE THAT GOVERNMENT MEASURES OR COURT RESOLUTIONS ARE ISSUED WITH DUE RESPECT FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES, THE RIGHTS OF MEN AND THE FUNDAMENTAL RULES WHICH GOVERN THE JURIDICAL LIFE OF THE COUNTRY, PREVENTING ABUSES OF POWER WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF ENSURING THE LEGAL SYSTEM, THEREFORE, BY THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE, ACTING AS COURT OF AMPARO, DENYING THE APPEAL, THE SENTENCES DICTATED AGAINST THE ACCUSED WERE CONFIRMED AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM DEMANDED THE EXECUTION OF THE SENTENCES PRONOUNCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND THE SYSTEM OF SEPARATION OF POWERS OF THE STATE AND IN FULL EXERCISE OF ITS SOVEREIGNTY.

         THE APPEAL FOR GRACE, DISAPPEARED FROM GUATEMALAN LEGISLATION BEING CONSIDERED ANACHRONISTIC. PARDON, IS GENERAL IN CHARACTER AND DOES NOT APPLY TO VERY SERIOUS CRIMES WHICH HAVE SHOCKED THE CONSCIENCE OF THE CITIZENRY, IN WHICH CASES SPECIFIC LAWS EXPRESSLY OMIT IT, AS IN THE CASE OF THE LAW OF AMPARO.

          16.          As it was expected, these executions and the circumstances in which they took place produced deep consternation throughout the world. Thus, that same day, March 3, an official spokesman of the Vatican states that: “In learning of the dramatic, unexpected and incredible news, the Holy Father has expressed his deepest sorrow, particularly since he is on the eve of his already scheduled visit to that country.”10

          17.          Moreover, the Government of Honduras, due to the fact that one of the men shot to death, Marco Antonio González, was an Honduran national, strongly condemned the incident through a statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating, at the same time, the several contradictions incurred by the Government of Guatemala, which had even assured the Foreign Ministry of Honduras that the “possibility of the execution of González was out of the question”, whom the Honduran Government had described as “a compatriot who has been carefully investigated by the Honduran authorities, not finding any criminal record nor any connection with terrorist groups.” The official statement of the Government of Honduras concludes expressing that “the news of the execution of Marco Antonio González has caused it enormous surprise and profound sorrow since the judicial process that led him to his death was vitiated in form and substance.”

          18.          For its part, the IACHR, also on the same day that the six persons were executed, sent the Government of Guatemala the following cablegram, which it later released to the public.

HIS EXCELLENCY

DR. EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

GUATEMALA (GUATEMALA)

         INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS HAS LEARNED WITH ASTONISHMENT THAT IN THE EARLY MORNING OF TODAY, IN EXECUTION OF SENTENCES DICTATED BY COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION, SOME OF THE PERSONS WHO HAD BEEN TRIED BY THOSE COURTS WERE SHOT TO DEATH IN GUATEMALA. THE ASTONISHMENT IS ALL THE GREATER SINCE THIS COMMISSION HAD ADDRESSED THE GUATEMALAN GOVERNMENT THROUGH CABLE COMMUNICATION DATED FEBRUARY 9, 1983, URGING THAT IN OBSERVANCE OF ITS INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS, WHICH IT PROFESSES TO RESPECT IN ARTICLE 7 OF THE FUNDAMENTAL STATUTE OF GOVERNMENT, IT RESCIND THE DEATH SENTENCE DICTATED BY THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION AND LATER MODIFY DECREE LAW 46-82, ORIGINATOR OF THOSE COURTS.

         AT THAT TIME, IT WAS EXPRESSED TO THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA THAT THE IACHR FINDS THAT THE IMPOSITION OF SUCH PENALTY IS IN OPEN CONTRADICTION TO WHAT IS STATED IN THE LAST PART OF PARAGRAPH 2 ARTICLE 4, OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO WHICH GUATEMALA EXPRESSED NO RESERVATION AT THE TIME OF RATIFICATION NOR AT ANY OTHER TIME AND ACCORDING TO WHICH THE IMPOSITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY WOULD NOT BE EXTENDED TO CRIMES WHICH DID NOT PREVIOUSLY CARRY SUCH PENALTY, WHICH WAS THE CASE OF THE PERSONS EXECUTED, WHO HAD BEEN TRIED AND SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR CRIMES WHICH WERE NOT SANCTIONED WITH THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE PENAL CODE OF GUATEMALA. THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DEPLORES THAT THE GOVERNMENT OF GUATEMALA PROCEEDED WITH THE EXECUTION OF THE SENTENCES IN QUESTION, AND THAT IT HAS YET TO RESPOND TO THE REFERRED CABLE COMMUNICATION AND EXHORTS IT TO, IN APPLICATION OF PARAGRAPH 2 ARTICLE 4, OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, ABSTAIN FROM IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY FOR CRIMES NOT CARRYING THAT PENALTY IN THE PENAL CODE IN FORCE AT THE TIME SAID CONVENTION WAS RATIFIED, AND TO RESPECT AND DULY OBEY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS IN THEIR MOST FAVORABLE INTERPRETATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LIFE AND THE OTHER HUMAN RIGHTS.

         I TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS, YOUR EXCELLENCY THE RENEWED ASSURANCES OF MY HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

         MARCO G. MONROY CABRA                   DAVID J. PADILLA

         CHAIRMAN                               ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

          19.          On March 15, 1983, the Government of Guatemala responded to this last IACHR communication, in the following terms:

DR. MARCO GERARDO MONROY CABRA

CHAIRMAN OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION

ON HUMAN RIGHTS

DR. DAVID PADILLA

ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

WASHINGTON, D.C.

         I ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF YOUR TELEX 351 OF MARCH 3, OF THIS YEAR. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT TO YOU THAT PARAGRAPH 2, OF ARTICLE 4, OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS TEXTUALLY STATES THAT: “IN THOSE COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE NOT ABOLISHED THE DEATH PENALTY, THIS COULD ONLY BE IMPOSED FOR THE MOST SERIOUS CRIMES, IN COMPLIANCE WITH VERIFIED SENTENCE FROM COMPETENT COURT AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH A LAW THAT ESTABLISHES SUCH PENALTY, ENACTED PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME. ITS APPLICATION WILL NEITHER BE EXTENDED TO CRIMES TO WHICH IS NOT PRESENTLY APPLIED.” IN THE PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH THE DEATH PENALTY WAS IMPOSED, THE PROVISIONS OF THAT ARTICLE ARE FULLY MET SINCE:

         A) IN GUATEMALA THE DEATH PENALTY HAS BEEN IN FORCE FOR MORE THAN FIFTY YEARS.

         B) IT IS ONLY IMPOSED FOR VERY SERIOUS CRIMES.

         C) IT IS ONLY EXECUTED IN COMPLIANCE WITH A VERIFIED SENTENCE OF A COMPETENT COURT.

         D) THE COURTS OF SPECIAL JURISDICTION LAW, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE DEATH PENALTY AND EXPRESSLY CITES THE CRIMES WHICH CARRY THAT PENALTY, WAS PROMULGATED PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIMES.

         AS FAR AS THE CONVENTION ESTABLISHING THAT THE DEATH PENALTY MUST NOT BE IMPOSED ON CRIMES FOR WHICH IT WAS NOT INDICATED IN THE INTERNAL LEGISLATION OF A COUNTRY AT THE TIME OF RATIFYING THE CONVENTION, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THIS PRECEPT CANNOT LIMIT THE SOVEREIGN POWER OF THE STATES TO MODIFY THEIR INTERNAL CRIMINAL LEGISLATION, WHEN THE SPECIAL OR EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN A COUNTRY MAKES IT IMPERATIVE TO SANCTION WITH THE DEATH PENALTY THE COMMISSION OF SERIOUS CRIMES, AS A PROTECTIVE MEASURE FOR SOCIETY ITSELF.

         THE COUNTRIES WHICH CONFRONT THE PROBLEM OF SUBVERSION, WHOSE ELEMENTS CONTINUOUSLY COMMIT SERIOUS COMMON CRIMES FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, ARE OBLIGATED, BASED ON THE DUTY TO GUARANTEE THE SAFETY OF THE CITIZENRY, TO TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES TO COMBAT THE CRIMINALS, FOR THEY CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC DANGER AND THEIR ACTIONS ARE A THREAT TO THE POPULATION.

         THEREFORE, A RIGID AND RESTRICTIVE INTERPRETATION OF THE AFOREMENTIONED DISPOSITION ONLY LEADS TO THE SITUATION THAT ANY STATE WHICH HAS RATIFIED THE CONVENTION IN QUESTION, IS DEPRIVED OF THE SOVEREIGN POWER TO MODIFY ITS INTERNAL LEGISLATION, WHICH WOULD NEGATE THE FACT THAT THE LAW, BY DEFINITION, IS ESSENTIALLY MODIFIABLE AND THAT IT MUST BE ADAPTED TO THE SOCIAL CHANGES—POSITIVE AND/OR NEGATIVE—WHICH TAKE PLACE IN ALL NATIONS.

         BESIDES, IN RATIFYING THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS GUATEMALA EXPRESSED SPECIFIC RESERVATION IN THE SENSE THAT IT WOULD CONTINUE TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY TO COMMON CRIMES RELATED TO POLITICAL CRIMES.

         THE RESERVATION MUST BE INTERPRETED IN GENERAL TERMS, SINCE THE FACT THAT PARAGRAPH 4 OF ARTICLE 4 OF THE CONVENTION WAS SPECIFICALLY CITED IS BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE PROHIBITION TO THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY TO COMMON CRIMES RELATED TO POLITICAL ONES IS CONTAINED, BUT THE RESERVATION SHOULD NOT IN ANY WAY BE INTERPRETED TO REFER ONLY TO THAT PARAGRAPH, BUT TO ANY PART OF THE CONVENTION WHERE THERE IS A SIMILAR RULE.

         THE PERSONS WHO WERE EXECUTED WERE FOUND GUILTY OF SERIOUS COMMON CRIMES COMMITTED WITH POLITICAL MOTIVATIONS. THE ACCUSED WALTER VINICIO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ, SERGIO ROBERTO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ, AND HÉCTOR HAROLDO MORALES LÓPEZ, WERE FOUND GUILTY OF THE CRIMES OF KIDNAPPING AND EXTORTION.

         THE ACTS OF WHICH THEY WERE ACCUSED ARE THE FOLLOWING: ON JULY 15, 1982, AT 14:00 HOURS, ON 20^TH STREET AND AVENIDA LA REFORMA, ON ZONE 9 OF THE CAPITAL CITY, THEY KIDNAPPED MRS. SILVIA XIMENA DE LA PEÑA FRATTA DE LÓPEZ, WHOM THEY DRUGGED AND LATER TOOK TO “EL TRESOL” MOTEL LOCATED IN ZONE 8, AS WELL AS TO OTHER PLACES, AVOIDING BEING FOUND BY THE SECURITY FORCES, WHILE THEY KEPT THEIR VICTIM SEDATED AND WHOM THEY ALSO RAPED.

         DURING THE KIDNAPPING THE ACCUSED WALTER VINICIO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ, IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS “COMMANDER FERNANDO” AND CLAIMED TO BELONG TO A DISSIDENT GROUP OF THE EGP. AS SUCH, HE DEMANDED OF DOCTOR ALEJANDRO ENRIQUE DE LA PEÑA, FATHER OF THE KIDNAP VICTIM, THE SUM OF SEVENTY FIVE THOUSAND QUETZALES (Q.75,000.00) IN EXCHANGE FOR HIS DAUGHTER'S FREEDOM AND THREATENED HIM THAT, IF HE DIDN'T PAY, THE KIDNAPPED WOMAN WOULD BE ASSASSINATED.

         AFTER A SERIES OF NEGOTIATIONS, TELEPHONE CALLS AND PRESSURE BY THE KIDNAPPERS, THE FATHER OF THE VICTIM AGREED TO PAY TEN THOUSAND QUETZALES (Q.10,000.00) AND THE KIDNAPPED WOMAN WAS LEFT BY HER KIDNAPPERS AT THE MAC DONALD'S RESTAURANT ON ZONE 9, WHERE SHE WAS FOUND UNDER THE EFFECTS OF A DRUG.

         DAYS LATER THE KIDNAPPED WOMAN RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL, HER INTERLOCUTOR IDENTIFIED HIMSELF ONCE MORE AS “COMMANDER FERNANDO” TELLING HER THAT HER FATHER SHOULD PAY AN ADDITIONAL FIFTY THOUSAND QUETZALES (Q.50,000.00) AS A WAR TAX UNDER THREAT OF KILLING HER TWO BROTHERS.

         THE FATHER OF THE VICTIM DECIDED TO INFORM THE AUTHORITIES OF THE KIDNAPPING OF HIS DAUGHTER, THE RANSOM PAYMENT, HER LATER RELEASE, AS WELL AS THE NEW THREATS BEING MADE BY THE KIDNAPPERS.

         IN ORDER TO CAPTURE THE KIDNAPPERS A PLAN WAS DEVISED, THERE WAS A PERIOD OF NEGOTIATIONS AND BARGAINING, AND FINALLY ACCEPTED PAYMENT OF THE WAR TAX, SETTING THE PLACE, DATE AND TIME OF PAYMENT.

         THE PLAN WAS FOLLOWED TO ITS CONCLUSION. DOCTOR DE LA PEÑA WENT TO THE CONVENED SITE, PRESUMABLY CARRYING THE MONEY FOR THE WAR TAX, AND AT THE MOMENT HE WAS HANDING OVER THE MONEY THE AUTHORITIES APPEARED AND CAPTURED THE KIDNAPPERS.

         THE ACCUSED WALTER VINICIO MARROQUÍN GONZÁLEZ, WHO DURING THE KIDNAPPING ACTED AS “COMMANDER FERNANDO” MET DOCTOR DE LA PEÑA AND HIS DAUGHTER WHEN THEY DISCUSSED THE SALE OF A LIFE INSURANCE POLICY.

         CARLOS SUBUYUG CUJ, PEDRO RAXON TEPET AND MARCO ANTONIO GONZÁLEZ WERE FOUND GUILTY OF A NUMBER OF CRIMES SUCH AS POSSESSION OF EXPLOSIVE MATERIALS, KILLINGS BY PLACING BOMBS IN THE PATH OF MILITARY UNITS CAUSING SEVERAL DEATHS, ASSAULT AND ROBBERY OF INTERDEPARTMENTAL BUSES, WHICH CHARACTERIZED THE IMAGE OF TERRORISM, WHICH THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY HAS CONSIDERED AS A CRIMINAL ACT TO BE CENSORED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

         ALL THREE COMMITTED THE COMMON CRIMES WITH POLITICAL MOTIVES, SINCE THEY CONFESSED BEING MEMBERS OF THE CLANDESTINE GROUP CALLED THE POOR'S PEOPLE GUERRILLA ARMY (EGP).

         THE DEFENSE LAWYERS OF ALL THE ACCUSED SUBMITTED AT THE OPPORTUNE TIME THE APPEAL FOR AMPARO, WHICH THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE HEARD, AND AFTER DULY SUBSTANTIATING IT AND COMPLETING ALL THE STEPS OF THE PROCESS ESTABLISHED FOR THIS APPEAL, INCLUDING A PUBLIC HEARING REQUESTED BY THE DEFENSE COUNSEL, DENIED THE APPEAL SINCE IT DID NOT FIND VIOLATIONS OF ANY KIND OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE FUNDAMENTAL STATUTE OF GOVERNMENT AND IN ADDITION, VERIFIED THAT THE ACCUSED HAD A LEGAL TRIAL AND HAD, AT ALL TIMES, THE GUARANTEES OF A DEFENSE DURING TRIAL.

         I MUST EXPRESS TO THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, THAT ABOVE ALL, AS A SACRED DUTY OF THE PUBLIC POWER, UNRENOUNCEABLE, ALL GOVERNMENTS HAVE THE OBLIGATION OF MAINTAINING THE PUBLIC ORDER IN THE MANNER IN WHICH THE NATIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES DEMAND IT, AND NOT ACCORDING TO THE DESIGNS OF THOSE WHO ERECT THEMSELVES INTO INFLEXIBLE JUDGES TO CONDEMN ONLY ONE OF THE SIDES IN THE STRUGGLE. THIS DEFENSE OF THE PUBLIC ORDER, OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY, OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN GUATEMALA, CANNOT BE CONSIDERED A VIOLATION OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, AND MY GOVERNMENT FEELS THAT ADVERSE JUDGMENT CANNOT BE PASSED AGAINST THE LEGITIMATE ACTION OF GUATEMALA IN THE VITAL PRESERVATION OF ITS INSTITUTIONS, WHICH ARE THE BASIS FOR THE SECURITY AND PEACE OF THE NATION AND THAT ALL MEASURES DEEMED PERTINENT MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST GUATEMALA, BUT I CAN ASSURE YOU THAT NOT ONE OF THEM LESSENS THE RIGHT TO THE LEGITIMATE DEFENSE OF A STATE, IN THIS CASE GUATEMALA, A RIGHT AFFIRMED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES.

         FINALLY, I BEG YOU GIVE THIS RESPONSE FROM MY GOVERNMENT THE WIDEST INTERNATIONAL DISSEMINATION WITH THE ABSOLUTE CONVICTION THAT IT WILL MAKE MANY STATESMEN, SOCIOLOGISTS, JURISTS, MORALISTS AND GOVERNMENTS SERIOUSLY REFLECT ON THE MATTER. IT IS VERY EASY TO BE ASTONISHED, AS YOU AFFIRM, WHEN ONE DOES NOT HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN THE DIGNITY, INTEGRITY AND THE IDENTITY OF A NATION.

         ACCEPT THE RENEWED ASSURANCES OF MY HIGHEST CONSIDERATION.

EDUARDO CASTILLO ARRIOLA

MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

OF THE REPUBLIC OF GUATEMALA

          continued...