
Trial starts for Salvadoran officers accused of killing Dutch journalists in 1982
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.
____
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
9 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Musk: 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election'
By Published: Updated: Elon Musk and President Donald Trump's spectacular falling out quickly turned personal Thursday as the world's richest man claimed the president would have lost the 2024 election without his help. Musk had publicly endorsed Trump on the heels of the July 13th assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania and poured around $290 million of his fortune into the Republican's campaign. The billionaire also joined Trump on the campaign trail when he returned to the site of the Butler shooting in early October, a month before Election Day. Trump said he likely still would have won the key state of Pennsylvania without Musk's assistance, partly because Kamala Harris didn't choose the state's governor, Josh Shapiro, to be her running mate. Even with Shapiro on the Democratic ticket, Trump claimed, 'I would have won Pennsylvania, I would have won by a lot.' Musk said that was laughable. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk claimed. 'Such ingratitude,' the billionaire added on X. Musk's comments came moments after Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, during German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's visit, that his bromance with the DOGE leader was likely over. 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will any more, I was surprised,' Trump said. The president suggested that Musk was angry - not over the bill ballooning the deficit - but because the Trump administration has pulled back on electric vehicle mandates, which negatively impacted Tesla. He also indicated that there was a problem when he rejected Musk's preferred nominee to lead NASA because his choice was a Democrat. 'And you know, Elon's upset because we took the EV mandate, which was a lot of money for electric vehicles, and they're having a hard time the electric vehicles and they want us to pay billions of dollars in subsidy,' Trump said. 'I know that disturbed him.' Shares of Tesla dipped 8 percent amid the spat. Over the weekend, Trump pulled the nomination of Jared Isaacman to lead NASA. Isaacman had worked alongside Musk at SpaceX. 'He recommended somebody that I guess he knew very well, I'm sure he respected him, to run NASA and I didn't think it was appropriate and he happened to be a Democrat, like totally Democrat,' Trump continued. 'We won, we get certain privileges and one of the privileges is we don't have to appoint a Democrat.' Musk posted to X repeatedly as Trump's press conference was going on. 'Whatever,' the billionaire wrote, as he continued to criticize what Trump has called his 'big, beautiful' spending bill. 'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' he advised. 'In the entire history of civilization, there has never been legislation that [is] both big and beautiful. Everyone knows this!' Musk continued. 'Either you get a big and ugly bill or a slim and beautiful bill. Slim and beautiful is the way.' In the Oval Office, Trump insisted that Musk knew the contents of the bill before the House passed it. Trump is now pushing Republican senators to back it so he can sign it before the July 4 holiday. 'He became a little bit different. I can understand that. But he knew every aspect of this bill. He knew it better than almost anybody, and he never had a problem until right after he left,' Trump protested. Musk immediately pushed back on X - sharing the clip of Trump's comments. 'False, this bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!' Musk said. At the top of Musk's X profile on Thursday, the billionaire had pinned a tweet that said 'Wise words,' highlighting a Trump tweet from 2013 that said, 'I cannot believe the Republicans are extending the debt ceiling—I am a Republican & I am embarrassed!' Trump noted that until recently Musk had 'said the most beautiful things about me.' Trump said Musk's about-face represented a greater trend. 'People leave my administration and they love us and then, at some point, they miss it so badly. And some of them embrace it and some of them actually become hostile. I don't know what it is, it's sort of Trump Derangement Syndrome, I guess they call it,' the president said. 'They leave, they wake up in the morning and the glamour is gone, the whole world is different and they become hostile.' The president's comments come less than a week after he feted Musk in the Oval Office, giving him an official farewell as the billionaire moved out of special government employee status and back into the private sector. Trump noted that he had given Musk a 'wonderful send-off' on Friday before he headed to Pittsburgh to tout a steel deal between Nippon and U.S. Steel. 'Remember, he was here for a long time. You saw a man who was very happy. He stood behind the Oval desk. Even with a black eye,' Trump said. 'I said, "do you want a little makeup?" And he said, "No I don't think so," which was interesting.' 'And very nice,' Trump added. 'He wants to be who he is,' the president shrugged.


The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
Who's in charge? CDC's leadership 'crisis' apparent amid new COVID-19 vaccine guidance
There was a notable absence last week when U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in a 58-second video that the government would no longer endorse the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children or pregnant women. The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — the person who typically signs off on federal vaccine recommendations — was nowhere to be seen. The CDC, a $9.2 billion-a-year agency tasked with reviewing life-saving vaccines, monitoring diseases and watching for budding threats to Americans' health, is without a clear leader. 'I've been disappointed that we haven't had an aggressive director since — February, March, April, May — fighting for the resources that CDC needs,' said Dr. Robert Redfield, who served as CDC director under the first Trump administration and supported Kennedy's nomination as the nation's health secretary. $9.2 billion-a-year agency without leader as nomination awaits The leadership vacuum at a foremost federal public health agency has existed for months, after President Donald Trump suddenly withdrew his first pick for CDC director in March. A hearing for his new nominee — the agency's former acting director Susan Monarez — has not been scheduled because she has not submitted all the paperwork necessary to proceed, according to a spokesman for Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who will oversee the nomination. HHS did not answer written questions about Monarez's nomination, her current role at the CDC or her salary. An employee directory lists Monarez, a longtime government employee, as a staffer for the NIH under the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health. Redfield described Kennedy as 'very supportive' of Monarez's nomination. Instead, a lawyer and political appointee with no medical experience is 'carrying out some of the duties' of director at the agency that for seven decades has been led by someone with a medical degree. Matthew Buzzelli, who is also the chief of staff at the CDC, is 'surrounded by highly qualified medical professionals and advisors to help fulfill these duties as appropriate,' Andrew Nixon, an HHS spokesperson said in a statement. Adding to the confusion was an employee-wide email sent last week that thanked 'new acting directors who shave stepped up to the plate." The email, signed by Monarez, listed her as the acting director. It was was sent just days after Kennedy said at a Senate hearing that Monarez had been replaced by Buzzelli. The lack of a confirmed director will be a problem if a public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic or a rapid uptick in measles cases hits, said Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota. 'CDC is a crisis, waiting for a crisis to happen,' said Osterholm. 'At this point, I couldn't tell you for the life of me who was going to pull what trigger in a crisis situation." An acting director rarely seen, and stalled decisions At CDC headquarters in Atlanta, employees say Monarez was rarely heard from between late January – when she was appointed acting director – and late March, when Trump nominated her. She also has not held any of the 'all hands' meetings that were customary under previous CDC chiefs, according to several staffers. One employee, who insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media and fears being fired if identified said Monarez has been almost invisible since her nomination, adding that her absence has been cited by other leaders as an excuse for delaying action. The situation already has led to confusion. In April, a 15-member CDC advisory panel of outside experts met to discuss vaccine policy. The panel makes recommendations to the CDC Director, who routinely signs off on them. But it was unclear during the meeting who would be reviewing the panel's recommendations, which included the expansion of RSV vaccinations for adults and a new combination shot as another option to protect teens against meningitis. HHS officials said the recommendations were going to Buzzelli, but then weeks passed with no decision. A month after the meeting ended, the CDC posted on a web site that Kennedy had signed off on recommendations for travelers against chikungunya, a viral disease transmitted to humans by mosquitos. But there continues to be no word about a decision about the other vaccine recommendations. Controversial COVID-19 vaccine recommendations bypassed CDC panel The problem was accentuated again last week, when Kennedy rolled out recommendations for the COVID-19 vaccine saying they were no longer recommended for healthy children or pregnant women, even though expectant mothers are considered a high-risk group if they contract the virus. Kennedy made the surprise announcement without input from the CDC advisory panel that has historically made recommendations on the nation's vaccine schedule. The CDC days later posted revised guidance that said healthy kids and pregnant women may get the shots. Nixon, the HHS spokesman, said CDC staff were consulted on the recommendations, but would not provide staffer's names or titles. He also did not provide the specific data or research that Kennedy reviewed to reach his conclusion on the new COVID-19 recommendations, just weeks after he said that he did not think 'people should be taking medical advice' from him. 'As Secretary Kennedy said, there is a clear lack of data to support the repeat booster strategy in children,' Nixon said in a statement. Research shows that pregnant women are at higher risk of severe illness, mechanical ventilation and death, when they contract COVID-19 infections. During the height of the pandemic, deaths of women during pregnancy or shortly after childbirth soared to their highest level in 50 years. Vaccinations also have been recommended for pregnant women because it passes immunity to newborns who are too young for vaccines and also vulnerable to infections. Nixon did not address a written question about recommendations for pregnant women. Kennedy's decision to bypass the the advisory panel and announce new COVID-19 recommendations on his own prompted a key CDC official who works with the committee – Dr. Lakshmi Panagiotakopoulos – to announce her resignation last Friday. 'My career in public health and vaccinology started with a deep-seated desire to help the most vulnerable members of our population, and that is not something I am able to continue doing in this role,' she wrote in an email seen by an Associated Press reporter. Signs are mounting that the CDC has been 'sidelined' from key decision-making under Kennedy's watch, said Dr. Anand Parekh, the chief medical adviser for The Bipartisan Policy Center. 'It's difficult to ascertain how we will reverse the chronic disease epidemic or be prepared for myriad public health emergencies without a strong CDC and visible, empowered director,' Parekh said. 'It's also worth noting that every community in the country is served by a local or state public health department that depends on the scientific expertise of the CDC and the leadership of the CDC director.'


Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's Chagos deal reported to UN human rights chiefs
Sir Keir Starmer's Chagos deal has been reported to UN human rights chiefs over claims it ignores native islanders' desire to return to their homeland. Campaigners have asked the UN's human rights committee in Geneva to examine the deal, under which the UK will give up the Chagos Islands to Mauritius and rent back a military base there. If successful, the request could result in a UN ruling in direct contradiction to the body's International Court of Justice, which said in 2019 that the UK should hand over the islands to Mauritius. Bernadette Dugasse and Bertrice Pompe, who are British citizens but native to the islands, launched an eleventh-hour bid to stop the deal last month, resulting in a dramatic injunction from the High Court in the middle of the night. But their legal challenge was rejected the next day, and the deal went ahead, including a commitment for the UK to pay Mauritius up to £30 billion over the next 99 years. Ms Dugasse and Ms Pompe are now taking their fight to the UN by writing to the committee asking for an advisory opinion that the UK should not sign the deal over human rights concerns. They allege the deal breaches five articles of the UN's international covenant on civil and political rights, including the right to self-determination, freedom of movement and right to return, and minority rights. The deal agreed by Sir Keir has been opposed by MPs from the Conservative and Reform parties, and Tory peers have since launched a campaign to block the deal from the House of Lords. But the Government insists that the deal is vital for national security and will allow the military base on the archipelago's biggest island, Diego Garcia, to continue to operate legally. It follows years of negotiations between Britain and Mauritius, which claims it should have been given sovereignty over the islands when it was given independence from the UK in 1968. The population of the islands, between 1,400 and 1,700 people, was removed in the late 60s and early 70s to make way for the military base. The displaced Chagossians claim that they were not consulted before the Starmer deal was signed, and complain that under the terms agreed between the UK and Mauritius, they will not be allowed to return to Diego Garcia. Ms Pompe said: 'The fight is not over. There is nothing in that treaty for Chagossians and we will fight.' The UN does not have the power to block the deal, but the committee could issue an advisory opinion that would inform Downing Street it could be in breach of international human rights obligations if it proceeds. The campaigners told the committee in a letter, seen by The Telegraph, that the deal 'would amount to a definitive and irreversible endorsement of a continuing violation originally initiated by the colonial power'. It goes on: 'By excluding the Chagossian people from the process and de facto accepting their permanent displacement, the agreement entrenches the denial of their right to return and the effective exercise of their cultural, spiritual rights.' Toby Noskwith, who coordinated last month's legal action, said: 'I pity the poor souls in the No10 press office who are being ordered to justify Keir Starmer's betrayal of the Chagossian people. 'We're looking forward to the explanation of why the UN human rights committee doesn't matter. Not pausing the Chagos deal until the Committee rules is indefensible.'