Univision News

Two ministers from the Humala administration have openly expressed their support of amnesty for convicted former Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori. The idea has been met with great resistance from Fujimori’s critics. (Getty Images)

By SANDRO MAIRATA
Channel: Latin American Affairs, Politics

What started as regular nightly interview became a political thunderstorm. Rudecindo Vega, Peru’s Minister of Labor, expressed his public support for amnesty provisions, which would benefit Alberto Fujimori, the former Peruvian ruler (1990-2000) who has been convicted of several human rights abuses.

“We should give amnesty to all sectors,” said Vega. “We have to create bridges to solidify the economic growth of the country, to make social inclusion sustainable, to strengthen decentralization, to fight corruption, and to promote public ethics.”

That Vega, who was Vice Minister of Housing, Construction, and Sanitation under the Alejandro Toledo administration (2001 – 2006), was the one pushing for amnesty raised suspicion from observers.

“It’s shocking, coming from the Toledo camp,” Enrique Chávez, political editor for the influential news magazine Caretas, told Univision News. “Those who push for this issue are usually Fujimori’s brother Santiago, who always says they’re advancing on it, and of course, Alberto Fujimori’s supporters. But toledismo is the most anti-Fujimori thing that could ever exist.” 

Toledo’s rise to power came after leading a fierce opposition to Fujimori’s extended tenure in office, a period which was marred with corruption and murder scandals, and many still label a dictatorship.

Chávez agrees with other sources in labeling Vega as a “flat out technician,” incapable of jumping into this issue all by himself.

“You are forced into thinking he might be following political instructions, or something like that,” Chávez said.

In the past, Peruvian politicians have either discussed the options of pardon or amnesty for abuses from army and terrorist organizations. It’s worth noting that pardon has a slight, but fundamental, difference with amnesty, the latter completely eliminates the punishment and cleans all charges as if they never existed, while the former forgives the punishment but the charges remain as of personal records. 

The concerns over Vega’s words are high because just months ago, Peruvian Minister of Defense Daniel Mora also expressed his support for amnesty for Fujimori, which may mean amnesty will be given to President Humala’s radical brother Antauro as well. Antauro is a former army major who was convicted for leading a rebellion against President Toledo in 2005, which resulted in the killing of four police officers.

“They both enjoy the silent approval of Premier (Salomón) Lerner and of President Humala when they speak of human rights, pardons or amnesties,” wrote Juan Sheput, former Minister of Labor himself for Alejandro Toledo.

Sources inside the Peruvian justice system, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told Univision News that one possible explanation for the sustained push for amnesty is an organized scheme around the goal of gaining the support of that portion of the country that still supports Fujimori. Back in the June 5 runoff election, Humala defeated Fujimori’s daughter Keiko by a tight 51% to 48% margin. 

If Humala is indeed considering pursuing a second tenure, according to these sources, he needs to win over Fujimori’s supporters, who want him freed on “humanitarian reasons” – namely his age, 73, and several claims of him suffering from different health conditions.

During the presidential campaign, Keiko Fujimori expressed that her father “is innocent of all charges.” Moreover, a couple of years ago, Alberto Fujimori’s lawyer, César Nakasaki, said his client only accepted the charges because “he doesn’t believe he’s going to have a fair trial anyway.”

Many still remember Univision’s Jorge Ramos interview with President Humala, who was visibly uneasy when asked to give a straight answer to whether he is considering running for reelection.

But the idea of completely forgiving a ruler held responsible for killings and kidnappings has been met with public resistance. Several human rights organizations, politicians, media outlets, and relatives of those affected by Fujimori’s actions are fighting at all levels to stop the initiative.

Sources also implied that people from the Humala administration had approached Javier Valle Riestra, a prominent Peruvian lawyer and longtime politician, in order to “handle” the legal requirements that would make Fujimori’s liberation possible. Valle Riestra contributed to the release of Yehude Simon – who later went on to become Prime Minister (2008-2009) under President Alan García’s second tenure (2006-2011).

Speaking to Univision News, Valle Riestra strongly denied the suggestion.

“It is not true. They don’t need me. They have congressmen, they have people who can work on it. I’m on excellent terms with President Humala, I’ve been his lawyer and also Antauro’s, his brother that is currently in prison, but that issue has not been offered to me,” Valle Riestra affirmed. As to his sympathy for the cause of “political and social amnesty,” he stated that “amnesty is not something arbitrary, it is considered by the Constitution,” he said. 

Still, another concern is that the terrorist organization Shining Path is jumping on the same amnesty bandwagon, calling for “a general amnesty for civilians, military, and policemen from the internal conflict,” according to a statement released on Monday by the so-called “Movement for Amnesty and Fundamental Rights” (Movimiento por Amnistía y Derechos Fundamentales), a legal arm linked to Shining Path. 

“The remarks made by the Minister of Labor and Labor Promotion, Mr. Rudecindo Vega, regarding general amnesty in Peru confirm our stances”, the statement read. 

“It’s clear that Shining Path is also benefiting from this,” said Ángel Páez, head of the investigative unit at La República, a national newspaper. 

“Since amnesty is not something automatic,” said Valle Riestra “it can be written in a way that would not allow these elements to infiltrate such amnesty … That would be a contradiction to the pacifying essence of it.”