Trial starts for Salvadoran officers accused of killing Dutch journalists in 1982
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador (AP) — The trial of three retired Salvadoran military officers for the 1982 killings of four Dutch journalists during the Central American country's civil war began Tuesday in the northern city of Chalatenango.
The three men could face prison sentences of up to 30 years if convicted in the jury trial, which was scheduled to start and conclude on the same day.
On trial are former Defense Minister Gen. José Guillermo García, 91, former treasury police director Col. Francisco Morán, 93, and Col. Mario Adalberto Reyes Mena, 85, who was the former army commander of the Fourth Infantry Brigade in Chalatenango.
García and Morán are under police guard at a private hospital in San Salvador, while Reyes Mena lives in the United States. In March, El Salvador's Supreme Court ordered that the extradition process be started to bring him back.
García was deported from the U.S. in 2016, after a U.S. judge declared him responsible for serious human rights violations during the early years of the war between the military and the leftist Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front guerrillas.
The Dutch TV journalists had linked up with leftist rebels and planned to spend several days behind rebel lines reporting. But Salvadoran soldiers armed with assault rifles and machine guns ambushed them and the guerrillas.
The prosecution of the men was reopened in 2018 after the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a general amnesty passed following the 1980-1992 war.
It moved slowly, but in March 2022, relatives of the victims and representatives of the Dutch government and European Union demanded that those responsible for killing Jan Kuiper, Koos Koster, Hans ter Laag and Joop Willemson be tried.
The United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador, which was set up as part of a U.N.-brokered peace agreement in 1992, concluded there was clear evidence that the killings were the result of an ambush set up by Reyes Mena with the knowledge of other officials, based on an intelligence report that alerted of the journalists' presence.
Other members of the military, including Gen. Rafael Flores Lima and Sgt. Mario Canizales Espinoza were also accused of involvement, but died. Canizales allegedly led the patrol that carried out the massacre of the journalists.
Juan Carlos Sánchez, of the nongovernmental organization Mesa Contra la Impunidad, in comments to journalists, called the trial a 'transcendental step that the victims have waited 40 years for.'
An estimated 75,000 civilians were killed during El Salvador's civil war, mostly by U.S.-backed government security forces.
The trial was closed to the public.
____
Follow AP's coverage of Latin America and the Caribbean at https://apnews.com/hub/latin-america
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Debates over presidential power to suspend habeas corpus resurface in Trump administration
The principle of habeas corpus, a legal phrase, is a simple one: Translated from the Latin as 'produce the body,' it provides that a judge may compel prosecutors to supply evidence to determine whether someone has been legally detained or arrested. In the U.S., a detained or arrested individual, or their legal representative, may ask a judge to decide based on the evidence presented whether the detainee has been legally confined. That process is termed 'seeking a writ.' Suspending the privilege of the writ, also known as 'suspending the writ,' denies that individual or their representation from making that request or a judge from honoring it. The 'privilege' in that phrase is a right of the accused. In the past few months, members of the Trump administration have raised the issue of the president's power to suspend the privilege of habeas corpus. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller in May 2025 shared with the media the news that administration officials were exploring the possibility of suspending the privilege of the writ to help the administration deport immigrants quickly. Eleven days later, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem declared at a congressional hearing that habeas corpus 'is a constitutional right that the president has to be able to remove people from this country,' a misunderstanding of this foundational legal right immediately challenged by New Hampshire Senator Maggie Hassan. Article I of the U.S. Constitution declares that 'the Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.' Suspension is thus a grave and serious matter. This is not the first time that Americans have debated which branch of government – the executive branch or Congress – has the power to suspend the privilege of the writ and under what circumstances it may do so. Habeas corpus became a major point of controversy during the Civil War, when President Abraham Lincoln suspended the privilege of the writ, first in parts of Maryland and later throughout the nation, without seeking prior congressional approval. While the Constitution provides for the suspension of the writ, the document is silent as to who has the power to exercise this authority. Although most of this section of the Constitution concerns the powers of Congress, it also addresses the power and authority of other branches in specific instances. And the use of the passive voice – 'shall not be suspended' – in this section leaves the question of who can suspend the writ open to interpretation. The questions of who may suspend the privilege of the writ and under what circumstances emerged in the spring of 1861. On April 12, Confederate forces fired on U.S.-controlled Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor, South Carolina, an act that is considered the formal start of the war. A week later, Marylanders supporting secession clashed with militia from Massachusetts and Pennsylvania who were making their way through Baltimore to defend Washington. Lincoln refused to honor requests from Maryland Governor Thomas Hicks and Baltimore Mayor George Brown to avoid transporting reinforcements through Baltimore. The president initially tried to skirt any conflict by routing the reinforcements through Annapolis. This proved a stopgap measure. On April 27, Lincoln authorized General Winfield Scott, commanding general of the U.S. Army, to suspend the privilege of the writ between Philadelphia and Washington, if necessary. This would permit arbitrary arrests and detaining of people determined to be acting in support of the insurrection. To protect national security, U.S. military authorities arrested John Merryman on May 25, 1861. Merryman, who was from Baltimore, was suspected of involvement in destroying railroad bridges to obstruct Union troop movements. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney honored a request from Merryman's lawyers to issue a writ of habeas corpus, only to have federal military authorities refuse to produce Merryman, who remained at his cell in Fort McHenry. Taney then ruled that neither Lincoln nor military personnel under his command could suspend the privilege of the writ when it came to civilians such as Merryman. 'If at any time the public safety should require the suspension of the powers vested by this act in the courts of the United States, it is for the Legislature to say so,' wrote Taney, quoting an 1807 opinion by Chief Justice John Marshall. Days later, on June 1, Taney offered a more extended decision reflecting his reasoning that Congress, not the president, could suspend the privilege of the writ. Taney was challenging the president's authority to act unilaterally. Lincoln ignored Taney's ruling. He reasoned that in time of emergency, especially with Congress not in session, he – as president – was compelled to act in the interests of national security. He did so to protect the movement of troops through Maryland to defend the national capital. Not only did Lincoln's order remain in place, but the president later expanded its geographic scope in several instances, most notably in September 1862. On the heels of issuing the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln authorized the detention of individuals accused of obstructing efforts to raise troops or who sought to support the rebellion. Unwilling to concede that Lincoln's actions need not seek congressional approval, Congress, first in 1861, then through the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863 offered retroactive sanction of the actions of the executive branch and, in 1863, empowered Lincoln to suspend the privilege of the writ in the future in the interests of national security for the duration of the rebellion. Democrats, however, criticized Lincoln's actions as arbitrary, unconstitutional and smacking of tyranny. Almost a decade later, in 1871, President Ulysses S. Grant declined to act on his own to suspend the privilege of the writ to prosecute white supremacist terrorists in the Reconstruction South, requiring that Congress first pass legislation authorizing him to do so. Since the Civil War, only once has a president unilaterally suspended the privilege of the writ without prior congressional authorization. That's what President Franklin D. Roosevelt did in Hawaii after the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, in order to combat any suspicious activity that might be construed as espionage. With Congress currently in session, lawmakers could authorize the president to suspend the privilege of the writ to set aside debates over executive overreach. Otherwise, presidents might define as emergencies situations that do not meet the extreme circumstances envisioned by the Constitution while sidestepping congressional approval. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Brooks D. Simpson, Arizona State University Read more: Habeas corpus: A thousand-year-old legal principle for defending rights that's getting a workout under the Trump administration Supreme Court's decision on deportations gave both the Trump administration and ACLU reasons to claim a victory − but noncitizens clearly lost How constitutional guardrails have always contained presidential ambitions Brooks D. Simpson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Migrants and ICE officers contend with heat, smog and illness after detoured South Sudan flight
WASHINGTON (AP) — Migrants placed on a deportation flight originally bound for South Sudan are now being held in a converted shipping container on a U.S. naval base in Djibouti, where the men and their guards are contending with baking hot temperatures, smoke from nearby burn pits and the looming threat of rocket attacks, the Trump administration said. Officials outlined grim conditions in court documents filed Thursday before a federal judge overseeing a lawsuit challenging Immigration and Customs Enforcement efforts to swiftly remove migrants to countries they didn't come from. Authorities landed the flight at the base in Djibouti, about 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) from South Sudan, more than two weeks ago after U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Boston found the Trump administration had violated his order by swiftly sending eight migrants from countries including Cuba and Vietnam to the east African nation. The judge said that men from other countries must have a real chance to raise fears about dangers they could face in South Sudan. The men's lawyers, though, have still not been able to talk to them, said Robyn Barnard, senior director of refugee advocacy at Human Rights First, whose stated mission is to ensure the United States is a global leader on human rights. Barnard spoke Friday at a hearing of Democratic members of Congress and said some family members of the men had been able to talk to them Thursday. The migrants have been previously convicted of serious crimes in the U.S., and President Donald Trump's administration has said that it was unable to return them quickly to their home countries. The Justice Department has also appealed to the Supreme Court to immediately intervene and allow swift deportations to third countries to resume. The case comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by the Republican administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living in the United States illegally. The legal fight became another flashpoint as the administration rails against judges whose rulings have slowed the president's policies. The Trump administration said the converted conference room in the shipping container is the only viable place to house the men on the base in Djibouti, where outdoor daily temperatures rise above 100 degrees Fahrenheit (38 degrees Celsius), according to the declaration from an ICE official. Nearby burn pits are used to dispose of trash and human waste, and the smog cloud makes it hard to breathe, sickening both ICE officers guarding the men and the detainees, the documents state. They don't have access to all the medication they need to protect against infection, and the ICE officers were unable to complete anti-malarial treatment before landing, an ICE official said. 'It is unknown how long the medical supply will last,' Mellissa B. Harper, acting executive deputy associate director of enforcement and removal operations, said in the declaration. The group also lacks protective gear in case of a rocket attack from terrorist groups in Yemen, a risk outlined by the Department of Defense, the documents state. ___ Associated Press writer Rebecca Santana contributed to this story.
Washington Post
3 hours ago
- Washington Post
Syrian families return home in time for Eid al-Adha after years in notorious displacement camp
AL-QARYATAYN, Syria — Yasmine al-Saleh has two occasions to celebrate this year: the Eid al-Adha holiday and her family's return home after nine years in a notorious displacement camp in the Syrian desert. True, the home they returned to, in the town of al-Qaryatayn in the eastern part of Syria's Homs province, was damaged during the nearly 14 years of civil war. Al-Saleh fears that even a small earthquake will bring it down on their heads. Many of the surrounding buildings have collapsed. 'When I first entered my house — what can I say? It was a happiness that cannot be described,' al-Saleh said tearfully. 'Even though our house is destroyed, and we have no money, and we are hungry, and we have debts, and my husband is old and can't work, and I have kids — still, it's a castle in my eyes.' Last month, the last families left Rukban, a camp on the borders with Jordan and Iraq that once housed tens of thousands of families who lived under a crippling siege for years. People started gathering in Rukban in 2015, fleeing Islamic State militants and airstrikes by the U.S.-led coalition, Russia and the forces of then-Syrian President Bashar Assad. Displacement camps became widespread in Syria during the war, but the situation in Rukban was particularly dire. While the bulk of the camps sprung up in opposition-controlled areas in the country's northwest, Rukban was hemmed in on all sides by areas controlled by Assad's forces and by the border. Jordan sealed its border and stopped regular aid deliveries in 2016 after a cross-border IS attack that killed seven Jordanian soldiers. For years, the U.N. and other humanitarian organizations were largely unable to bring aid in. Food, water and other essentials were only available via smuggling at exorbitant prices, and there was almost no access to medical care. Al-Saleh recalled that when she gave birth to her two daughters, she feared that she would die in childbirth as other women in the camp had. In recent years, some aid got in via the U.S. Army. The camp was located in a 55-km (34-mile) 'deconfliction zone' surrounding the base. Many of the camp's residents were families of fighters with the U.S.-backed Syrian Free Army. 'Conditions were horrid,' said Lt. Col. Ryan Harty, who was stationed at the nearby al-Tanf garrison as squadron commander in 2024 and assisted with the aid shipments. 'They lacked medical care, medical supplies, food, basic food supplies, water — anything you could think of that you would need to sustain life, they lacked.' The U.S.-based NGO Syrian Emergency Task Force worked with military officials to implement a provision that allows American aid groups to send humanitarian goods on military cargo planes if the planes are not fully loaded with military supplies. Eventually they were also able to secure seats on the planes to bring doctors to the camp. Maj. Bo Daniels, who was chief of the civil affairs team al-Tanf in 2023, was the first to realize that doctors could be classified as 'humanitarian aid.' 'I've been in the Army now for 24 years. I'm an Afghanistan and Iraq veteran,' Daniels said. He has mixed feelings about those deployments. But in Syria, he said, he felt that 'every day my missions really, truly mattered.' Working in Rukban, he said, was 'was probably the proudest thing I've ever done in my military career.' Still, the situation remained dire. A few months before Assad's fall, Amnesty International issued a statement condemning the Syrian government's tightening siege of the camp and criticizing Jordanian authorities for continuing to 'unlawfully deport Syrians to Rukban despite the camp's unlivable conditions' and the U.S. government for making 'little visible effort to improve the desperate conditions despite its ability to do so.' Many former residents were desperate enough to leave the camp and head to government-held territory, risking arrest and forcible conscription to the Syrian army. Before Assad's fall, about 8,000 people remained. After Assad fell, there was an immediate exodus from the camp. But a few hundred people — including al-Saleh's family — remained, unable to scrape together the funds to make the move. Islamic Relief USA paid for trucks and buses to move some 564 people and their belongings back to their homes last month. The Syrian Emergency Task Force said in a statement that the repatriation of those families brings 'an end to one of the worst humanitarian crises in Syria' and 'marks the end of the tragedy of Rukban.' For some, their return was bittersweet. Bakir al-Najim, another recent returnee to al-Qaryatayn, said, 'After 10 years of displacement, we will celebrate Eid al-Adha back in our hometown.' But, he said, 'we are poor, we have no jobs, we have no food or drinks to offer our (Eid) guests.' Ahmed Shehata, chief executive officer of Islamic Relief USA, said the UN agencies and other humanitarian organizations that would normally provide aid to returning refugees and internally displaced people are scrambling to find the funding after the Trump administration's recent major cuts to U.S. foreign aid. He said his organization is in talks with the U.N. refugee agency UNHCR about allocating a significant amount of funding to provide aid to those returning to their homes. Al-Saleh said however difficult her family's circumstances are now, they are nothing compared to the time they spent in Rukban. 'Rukban was a death camp,' she said. 'All I can say about it is that it was a death camp.' —— Sewell reported from Damascus, Syria. Associated Press writer Malak Harb in Beirut contributed to this report.
