Police Role in Bolivian Municipal Clash Must Be Thoroughly Investigated
An ongoing municipal conflict in Yapacaní, in the Santa Cruz department, exploded on January 11, leading to three civilian deaths. In March 2011, a group of council members suspended MAS Mayor David Carvajal due to accusations of corruption, a common occurrence in Bolivia local governments. However, their suspension did not properly follow legal procedures and 22 days later Carvajal resumed his office despite ongoing controversy. In December of 2011, the Inter-institutional Committee of Yapacaní blockaded the highway connecting Santa Cruz with Cochabamba, demanding that Carvajal resign. The Yapacaní municipal council replaced him with an interim mayor; Carvajal’s lawyer obtained a court order reinstating him.
On January 9, 2012, 450 police accompanied Carvajal back to his office in Yapacaní. Predictably, the Inter-institutional Committee responded negatively. People took to the streets and tensions between civilians and police came to a head on the night of January 11. Two people died of gunshot wounds, a third died accidentally and at least 60 were injured, among them 17 police. Carvajal resigned that night.
Government denies police abuses
Minister of Government Wilfredo Chávez maintained that police only had permission to use dissuasive force, and that the deaths could therefore not have been caused by police. He also claimed that protestors ambushed the police using buckshot and rubber bullets.[i] However, Iver Campero, leader of the Yapacaní Inter-Institutional Committee, accused Santa Cruz District Commander of Police, Lily Cortez, of firing the first shot against one of the men who died.[ii]
On Monday, January 16th, the Inter-institutional Committee reinstated their blockade, this time demanding the resignation of a number of officials including Minster of the President, Carlos Romero, Minister of Rural Development, Nemesia Achacollo, and District Commander of Santa Cruz Police Department, Lily Cortez.[iii]
Minister blames detainees for civilian deaths
The Committee also demanded the release of five detainees. Romero told ABI, the Bolivian government news agency, that detained protestors would not be released because they were responsible for Wednesday’s killings. He said they tested positive for gunshot residue according to the GSR analysis (prueba de guantelete). He affirmed this was a “phenomenal element or an indicator to clarify this investigation” and added that “the criminals that used firearms against citizens and police should be imprisoned for 30 years,”[iv] the maximum sentence permitted by Bolivian law.
Emerging facts have raised ample doubts about Romero’s accusation of the five detainees. The test that Romero cited as evidence that the detainees used firearms—the GSR analysis—is no longer used by Bolivian Law Enforcement or the Forensics Investigations Institute.[v] Instead they use more reliable atomic absorption analysis. While Romero may have simply mentioned the GSR analysis in error, the mistake calls his credibility on the investigation into question. Furthermore, proof that detainees shot firearms is not sufficient evidence that those detainees were responsible for the two gunshot deaths.
District Attorney Investigator Refutes Romero
As if Romero’s faulty logic weren’t enough call his accusations into question, on January 16th, prosecutor José Luis Bravo, leading the investigation into the three fatalities, said that the five detainees couldn’t possibly be responsible for the killings as police detained them on the two days before the shootings took place.[vi]
Despite the clearly escalating nature of the situation prior to the January 11th violence, no human rights monitors were present to witness the actual events. Hours after the deaths, the Human Rights Ombudsman’s office, legislative human rights committee and the district attorney’s office[vii] launched three separate investigations; not one has thus far uncovered the details of the fatalities.
The Inter-Instituitional Committee and the Government came to an agreement on January 17 that would end the blockade. In return, the government agreed to release the detainees, pay compensation to the families of the deceased and the injured, reimburse the costs of 22 motorcycles that were damaged or destroyed, return media equipment that was confiscated, institute a plan for fighting dengue fever in Yapacaní and launch an exhaustive investigation into the events of January 11th.[viii]
Government follow-through on all the agreed upon points is critical. Investigators must seriously evaluate whether protestor deaths occurred as a result of excess force by police officers. The authors of deaths in Yapacaní must be identified and held legally accountable. Ending impunity for human rights abuses is essential to restore public faith in Bolivia’s judiciary.
[i] La Razon, “Yapacani cierra jornada violent con la muerta de 3 manifestantes,” 12 January 2012
[ii] El Erbol. “Acusan a la Comandante Cortez de causar un muerto y piden la renuncia de Chavez.” 12 January 2012.
[iii] Pagina Siete, “Yapacani iniciara un bloqueo para liberar a cinco detenidos,” 16 January 2012.
[iv] Los Tiempos “Romero: La prueba de guantelete dio positivo,” 15 January 2012.
[v] AIN interview with former state prosecutor, 16 January 2012.
[vi] Los Tiempos, “La Fiscalia descarta que civiles causaron muertes,” 17 January 2012.
[vii] Los Tiempos, “Tres entidades investigaran las muertes de Yapacaní,” 15 January 2012.
[viii] Los Tiempos, “Acuerdo entre Gobierno y Comité Interinstitucional de Yapacaní pone fin a conflicto,” 17 January 2012.