As the controversy surrounding money laundering allegations at the highest echelons of government continues to capture headlines, Indy reporter Sabrina Hummel finds out what people have to say on the matter.

Alberto, 61, businessman, Palermo

What concerns me are not these allegations of corruption, rather the way the current government is handling the country. Money laundering is just another symptom of the government’s mismanagement. We all knew it was going on. In the ’80s, prior to her presidency, reporters asked Cristina “Why do you need so much money?” to which she replied, “to be a real politician you need lots of money”. I’m not sure whether she became a politician to gain access to money, or if she really does require such vast sums of money in order to be a politician. I do think though that perhaps for the current administration, politics is a pretext under which they make their money. They really like money, its really sad. This country could be in a much better place if politicians exercised a little common sense.

Juan Manuel, 26, shop assistant, Gualeguaychú

I am aware that both corruption and money laundering exist in this government, as in all governments. Mainstream media only brings a small part of this corruption to our attention. I don’t think there is a single politician who could be said to be 100% free of corruption. I don’t know who to vote for. No one can say anything for certain. They are all bad – you just have to choose the lesser evil. The current party’s public relations – in garnering the support of famous sports persons and actresses speaks volumes of how seriously politics is treated here! I know corruption is prevalent everywhere, but I don’t think a change in government would fix it, indeed it will continue to happen or get worse.

Maria, 75, retired, Spain

My grandchildren would never live here – one of them is living in Brazil. The situation here is a disaster. I am totally against what is going on. I’ve lived here for 55 years and the situation is only getting worse and worse. I know this country intimately, and it saddens me to see what is going on here.

Paula, 20, student, Palermo

The government has spent years and years stealing and laundering money. That people continue to vote for this government and that they continue to have such strong support is unbelievable. The fact that the government is trying to divert attention away from these allegations (as they have done in other instances) is awful. They are not taking responsibility for their crimes. Whenever something emerges that casts the government in a bad light, they try and change the subject, in this case, with changes to the judiciary. It is an attempt to distract the population from what is really going on and gives their own party something to focus on. It does not surprise me that the government has been money laundering.

Roberto, 62, specialist in religious anthropology, United States

Corruption is a global problem. Argentina is just a part of the world where this is happening – all countries are connected. Obviously there are levels of corruption: some corruption is subtler whilst some is more blatant. Corruption in Argentina is blatant. In reality, corruption is part of life, it’s just that in Argentina people have become accustomed to it. The assassination of JFK in the USA is an example of corruption, in total three presidents have been assassinated there. The Argentines are unique. They don’t care what’s going on, rather they keep doing what they are doing. Argentines like to pontificate, they like to give their opinion on things, but then they don’t to anything about it. They carry on with their lives as if nothing was going on. In effect the people are partly to blame for corruption thanks to their antipathy and lack of resistance. If eliminating corruption were something they really cared about, they would do something about it. Argentina in undisciplined, it is like a spoilt child who doesn’t respect rules. Argentines are great as individuals, but are lacking as a whole.

The Kirchnerist governments have had their fair share of political scandals over the years, most of which have been played out very publicly for the world to see and cast judgement on. However, one of the government’s most sensational and drawn out political disputes is with media conglomerate Grupo Clarín, the largest in the country. The relationship between the two institutions has been extremely fraught since the 2008 ‘campo crisis‘ and the 2009 media law, which forces Clarín, as well as other media groups, to divest an important number of its assets.

Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (photo: Wikimedia commons)

What started as a power struggle between the two sides has developed into a political war, and the latest report broadcast by one of Clarín’s TV channels implicating President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and her late husband Néstor Kirchner in a money laundering scheme, promises to antagonise the situation further.

The Allegations

In several instalments of the television show Periodismo Para Todos (PPT), which airs on Clarín-owned Channel 13 on Sunday nights, journalist Jorge Lanata has presented testimonies, including hidden-camera footage, that implicate the Kirchners in a multi-million dollar corruption scandal.

According to sources making the allegations, the Kirchners have played key roles in a money laundering network to execute millions of dollars worth of corrupt tenders for public development and infrastructure projects. The total amount that is suspected to have been laundered by the Kirchners and their network is unknown, although sources say up to US$500m of public funds have been embezzled.

Jorge Lanata on PPT (photo: Wikipedia)

One of the first witnesses to come forward in this case was Nestor Kirchner’s ex secretary Miriam Quiroga, who revealed on Lanata’s show that she saw bags – which she believed had money in them – being passed around the Casa Rosada while working for the former president. These bags, she says, were sent by private jet to the Kirchners’ mansion in Santa Cruz province, to then be deposited in a specially constructed vault. The money is believed to have then been flown to tax havens abroad, including Switzerland, Panama, and Belize.

The vault, supposedly fitted specially at the Kirchners’ home, has been a highlighted piece of information in this unfolding political scandal and the subject of great intrigue in Lanata’s show. The first source to speak up about the existence of the alleged safe was former deputy governor of Santa Cruz, Eduardo Arnold, who told Lanata that the vault was specifically fitted and used in the Kirchners’ home for money laundering purposes.

Unsurprisingly, next up in Lanata’s primetime drama was the Kirchners’ family architect Antonio Canas, who revealed the structural plans of the residence in El Calafate, and told viewers about a vault-like room “like that of a bank’s” that was especially built on the request of Néstor Kirchner “to keep documents safe”.

The Accused

Another key player in this alleged money laundering network is Argentine businessman Lázaro Baez, who has been pegged as the Kirchners’ main accomplice. One of the typical money funnelling transactions that is currently under investigation from Báez’s business empire, Austral Construcciones, is that of a fraudulent cover up investment. In 2011, Baez’s business recorded an income of more than $254.3m from ‘mysterious’ trust funds in Uruguay. However, the investment, due to come from a Dutch registered company, was never received, although a failure to record this kept the balance sheets firmly in order.

These new findings cast a darker shadow on the connection between Báez and Cristina Fernández and Néstor Kirchner, the latter of which is said to have awarded Báez some of the main public works contracts of Santa Cruz when he was the province’s governor. Public tenders have been left in the hands of Austral Construcciones for the last decade.

The Kirchner family mausoleum in Rio Gallegos (photo: Wikimedia commons)

Santa Cruz’s former prosecutor and lawyer Andres Vivanco spoke out on the weekend about the latest findings. Speaking to Radio Mitre, he said that Báez “was previously just a bank employee who has no legal way of justifying his increased equity”.

“All Lázaro Báez has is from Néstor Kirchner. He previously had nothing; he was not an entrepreneur because he never risked his capital, he would always just wait to submit a public ‘tender’ with the government.” Vivanco added that the former president had frequently told his inner circle that “no one could govern without using corrupted means”.

Another suspect in the case is businessman Leonardo Fariña, who in one of Lanata’s weekly instalments was secretly filmed telling the journalist about his involvement in the money laundering deals. Fariña is believed to have been managing the accounts for various businesses that Báez and the Kirchners were allegedly involved in. However, he later denied his involvement, saying that he was aware of the secret filming activity and was merely “playing along”. “Lanata wanted fiction, so I gave him fiction,” Fariña said.

The Drama

As the pieces of this disturbing puzzle come together, Lanata is continuing to keep viewers at the edge of their seats with a week-by-week telenovela-style drama; and the latest show which aired last Sunday night was no exception. The programme released footage of the former president Néstor Kichner joking about opening a safe, and Clarín, in a manner that reflects its political tone, described it as being similar to “a child running to open his Christmas presents”.

Additionally, Lanata also revealed details that implicate Néstor Kirchner and Báez in another alleged money laundering scam with a representative of the Buenos Aires Racing Club football team, Miguel Ángel Pires. According to Lanata, the trio worked together to funnel government funds for the purchase of football players, Roberto Ramírez, Pablo Luguercio, Cristian Pellerano, and Leandro González.

Periodismo Para Todos

“I saw him (Pires) at least twice, with the club’s former secretary Daniel Muñoz handing over bags of money to buy players,” journalist Nicolas Wiñazki told the audience on Sunday’s edition of PPT, where he also said that Pires knew Báez since his son, Martín Baez, lived with Pires’ mum when he was studying in Buenos Aires. Pires, however, has denied personally knowing the Báez family and, as with many other aspects of this case, it all comes down to conflicting testimonies rather than solid evidence.

With Sunday’s show packed with twist and turns, it is safe to say that, once again, Lanata reeled his audience in and gave them the controversy and drama that 22% of Argentina’s population tune in for every week. And with its rising popularity comes another twist, and this time from the government. The Argentine Football Association (AFA) announced last week that one of the popular national first division matches, involving either Boca Juniors or River Plate, will now begin at 9.30pm on Sunday evening; a move that is believed to have come from government orders to conflict with the TV schedule of PPT.

The Case

As speculation and evidence has mounted over the last month, the inquiry has been brought to the attention of the District Attorney of Investigations of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism who launched an official investigation in mid-April.

Deputy Elisa Carrió took the case before the court alongside opposition representatives Patricia Bullrich, Federico Pinedo, Laura Alonso, and Carlos Brown. Further, the prosecution judge Sebastian Cassanello has called for an investigation into all of the businesses that Baez and Leonardo Fariña are linked to.

Talking about the case, Carrió said: “The information [from the released footage] does not surprise me… It is clear that [Néstor] Kirchner was Lázaro Báez’s boss. I presented the lawsuit for illicit association of [Néstor] Kirchner and Lázaro Báez. There was a fraudulent manoeuvre of US$400m. In this moment, Cristina [Férnandez de] Kirchner and Lázaro Báez are accomplices.”

Quiroga was one of the first witnesses to stand before the court last week, where she spoke for more than four hours about her time as Kirchner’s secretary. Media reports based on ‘inside sources’ offer conflicting versions about her testimony in court, but generally coincide on highlighting that she ratified witnessing meetings between Kirchner and several businessmen, although she could not confirm that they were ‘business partners’. Quiroga did not give testimony regarding the alleged money bags, as that case is being handled by a different judge. She has since been placed under a witness protection programme.

Báez was charged for being a suspect in the case on 3rd May, and since then he has provided a written statement in rejection of the money-laundering suit filed against him. The businessman said that he would “clarify once and for all” the charges made against him. Báez claimed he would help judicial authorities with the investigation that also includes his son Martín Baez and three other businessmen, Federico Elaskar, Fabian Rossi, and Daniel Perez. “As an honest person that I am, I am rejecting these false accusations,” said Báez in a letter to the court.

Meanwhile, the government held its silence about the case until last Friday, when the presidency’s undersecretary Gustavo López accused Grupo Clarin of launching an anti-government campaign to coincide with October’s mid-term elections. “This criminal investigation is an invention and an attack on the government.” He added that the accusations are a sign of “disrespect against a person [Nestor Kirchner] who is now dead and cannot defend himself. ”

Senator Aníbal Fernández has also spoken up about the issue and called Lanata’s investigation into the money laundering “stupid”. “It is not the first time that Grupo Clarín has lied, but for me, it makes no sense. There are four reports that are not going to go anywhere, because they don’t have sufficient evidence.”

As fresh allegations and denials surface daily, time will only tell if Lanata’s investigations have any grounds to tarnish the Kirchner government, and its legacy. However, one thing is clear; as this political show continues to play out, luring in spectators with its twists and cliffhangers, Lanata and PPT, much to the government’s frustration, will not be going anywhere soon.

The Indy took to the streets to hear what people had to say about these allegations. Click here to find out.

In the wake of the brutal confrontation that occurred at Hospital Borda on 26th April between protesters and the Metropolitan Police, controversy has once again surfaced surrounding the city of Buenos Aires’ police force.

The incident at the psychiatric hospital left approximately 50 people injured and eight were arrested after batons, tear gas, and rubber bullets were used in response to protesters opposing the advancement of the construction of a civic centre on site.

The Hospital Borda incident follows a series of violent encounters between the public and the Metropolitan Police. Protests at Parque Centenario earlier this year saw over 20 arrested and a similar violent police response utilised, while the brutal police evictions at Parque Indoamericano in 2010 left two residents dead.

Such instances of police intervention have led many to question whether Mauricio Macri’s notoriously ‘tough on crime’ police force are abusing their power and responding with excessive and unnecessary force. The Argentina Independent took to the streets and asked locals their opinion on Buenos Aires’ controversial Metropolitan Police.

Pedro Hahn, 66, Retired, La Boca

The Metropolitan Police are relatively new, and I don’t know too much about their history or how they run as a force, but until now I think they were a relatively accepted presence and authority. But what happened at Borda changed things, and shone a light on who they really are, and the excessive force they don’t hesitate to use. But I’m not an expert; this is just the opinion of an ordinary citizen.

Mariana Espeche, 25, Secretary, Capital Federal

I think that without a doubt the Metropolitan Police abused their power that day at Borda. I have a friend there who was very insecure about what was happening. I don’t think the behaviour of the police was justified at all. As for a solution, the construction of the civic centre is complicated and raises other social and political questions, but we must remember that the violent confrontation of the Metropolitan Police is not an isolated case. Their abuse of power has not only occurred at Borda.

Matias Conte, 18, Student, Monte Grande

I don’t honestly know if they generally act this way, but in the Borda case, the Metropolitan Police undoubtedly acted with excessive force and abused their authority. What happened at Borda has really brought to the forefront the argument of police intervention and brutality, which I think is a discussion that really needs to be had. This is something that needs to be raised, and perhaps it’s in police training when the incorporation of these ideas occurs, the idea that excessive force is not only sometimes necessary but encouraged. In my opinion, generally speaking, police intervention and brutality is not necessary, and it especially wasn’t in the Borda case.

Matias Amesto, 25, Student, Retiro

I think that what happened at Borda is very much a demonstration of the politics and views that Mayor Macri has about social protests and demonstrations. He is very much a repressor of certain social groups and sections of society. Before the Metropolitan Police arrived, it was not an excessive or out of control situation, the arrival of the police, and their violence and use of rubber bullets etc., escalated the situation to what it was. I also think that due to certain media coverage, Macri and his actions are protected, and he therefore doesn’t have to deal with the consequences. 

Ilumine Fernandez, 21, Student, Villa Lugano.

They have a lot of power, yes, as does the city government and the policies of Macri. I think they have a lot of power, but then they abuse their power with a streak of violence. I’m not sure if there was a different Mayor if they could regulate the power the police force has, or whether the Metropolitan is built upon a physical and violent manner of dealing with situations. Although in the country there is a wider problem with unnecessary intervention and an abuse of authority, such as with the gendarmes. It is not just the Metropolitan Police who act excessively.

The repressive behaviour of police has once again been condemned following violent clashes between protestors and the city’s Metropolitan police force at Borda hospital on 26th April. In the most recent chapter of ‘unnecessary’ police brutality, over 50 people were injured when rubber bullets and tear gas were fired in an attempt to suppress those campaigning against the demolition of a rehabilitation workshop, Protected Workshop number 19. The events reminded many of those that unfolded at Parque Indoamericano in December 2010, which left three people dead, resulting in the public condemnation of Mauricio Macri and his ministers.

The Metropolitan Police force may be young, having only been created in 2008, but since it began operations in 2010 a number of incidents have married its reputation and many believe it has much to answer for given its aggressive handling of evictions and protests.

Borda Bedlam

Patricio Tejedor, a journalist working for La Tribu radio station, was injured during the protests and was shocked by the attitude and uncompromising actions of the Metropolitan police. “The protesters were standing in a line facing the police who were positioned opposite. They seemed hostile from the onset, before anything had even happened. I was filming the events with my crew and then suddenly and without warning the police started firing into the crowd. They just kept on firing relentlessly. As a journalist I thought I would be safe but I was hit by five rubber bullets no more than ten metres away,” he says. Tejedor required medical treatment after taking the projectiles in the side of his body. “I was dragged away and treated by an ambulance on the scene,” he adds.

Video of the repression in El Borda hospital, filmed by the La Tribu journalists. 

Dr. Luis Herbst, Secretary of the Argentine Psychiatrists’ Association, works at Borda hospital and witnessed the action first hand shortly after arriving on that Friday morning. He was shocked by the aggressive nature of the police, especially as they gave no apparent warning before opening fire. Columns of smoke rising into the sky, from burning car tires, was the first thing Dr. Herbst noticed.

“Something was different that morning,” he says. “I saw the smoke and a police motorcycle blocking the entrance of the hospital. I heard the drums of the protesters, they came face to face with the Metropolitan police and I heard a series of loud bangs. Surprisingly there was no warning before the police started firing rubber bullets into the crowds of protesters made up of doctors, nurses, and patient’s families. Many were wounded, including journalists.” Many of Dr. Herbst’s colleagues and friends were injured but the thing that struck him most was the relentless barrage of bullets that rained down on the protesters. “It all happened so quickly. The police continued firing, it was terrible,” he adds.

Metropolitan Police officers claim to have acted in self-defence after being attacked by protestors at Borda, and Buenos Aires City Deputy Mayor, Maria Eugenia Vidal, ratified this at a press conference shortly after the conflict, defending the eviction. Vidal said that the police acted in the interests of the patients, protecting them after the crowds resisted police orders. Security Minister Guillermo Montengero also backed the operation saying that officers “follow an action protocol to stop crime.” However, he did say the events were to be “audited” and the officer’s performance “evaluated”.

Parque Indoamericano: The First Scandal

The repression at Borda Hospital last month is but one example of the police’s excessive use of force. This year alone, the evictions of protesters at Parque Centenario and Sala Alberdi have raised complaints about the violence with which the Metropolitan police has acted. However, the worst example of recent excesses in the use of force in the city can be found in the Parque Indoamericano incidents in late 2010. In that case, the Federal police was also involved.

Incidents at Parque Indoamericano in 2010 (photo by Kate Sedgwick)

In December 2010, Federal and Metropolitan police attempted to forcibly evacuate 200 settlers from Parque Indoamericano, a large green area in the south of the city, as the result of a court ruling. By the end of the day two people had been killed and dozens more injured. After the police pulled out, local armed mobs began attacking the camp, killing one more. The Federal police insisted only rubber bullets were used and denied any wrongdoing; the Metropolitan force took the same standpoint. Following an investigation, Judge Eliseo Otero cleared the 44 police officers involved, 11 of which were members of the Federal police, of all charges. Judge Maria Cristina Nazar, who ordered the eviction of the settlers, was also cleared. However, a tribunal annulled their dismissal and the investigation remains ongoing following the removal of Otero.

The national government has admitted that during the initial stages of the eviction Federal police acted without political direction, which suggests that they were initially able to act as they pleased, which may or may not have involved the shooting of lead bullets. Then-Cabinet Chief, Aníbal Fernández, said, “The conflict began with the Metropolitan police entering a certain area, and when it turned violent the Federal police interceded without any political instruction.” He also said that the bullets found in the two victims were from a shotgun and could have been fired from “a police, civilian, or home-made” weapon.

It must be noted that not every eviction involving the Metropolitan police can be distinguished by a hailstorm of rubber and lead. Take the eviction that happened in Bajo Flores in May 2011 as an example. Up to 120 squatters were calmly ushered from housing complexes after two hours with the help of social workers and negotiators. There was an element of trouble when a small group of protesters set five houses on fire but the flames were quickly put out. Only one arrest was made. The use of social workers and negotiators seems apt and a more measured approach – protocol followed correctly.

Vague Protocol

The evidence seen thus far would suggest police protocol involves the use of rubber ammunition, tear gas, and extreme force. Certainly those who have come under fire from the Metropolitan police in recent months will testify to the use of severe violence. Even lead bullets, reportedly fired by police, have injured members of the public, including a journalist and photographer who were wounded while reporting on the protest at San Martín Cultural Centre on 13th March.

“I was hit by a lead bullet that perforated my thigh, by a Metropolitan police officer who shot me at the intersection of Corrientes and Paraná,” said the journalist who was reporting for the Alternative Media Network. Initially the authorities denied using lead bullets, although Montenegro later admitted that two people were hit a few blocks away from where the original conflict occurred. The investigation is ongoing.

Montenegro, Vidal, and Chief of Cabinet Horacio Rodríguez Larreta give a press conference after the Borda incidents (photo courtesy of Buenos Aires City Government)

When Montenegro was interviewed live on Radio 10 shortly after events at Borda it became clear that the definition of an ‘action protocol’ was not particularly clear. Despite stating that “protocol was perfectly fulfilled” during the protests, Montenegro was only able to refer to a general protocol document used by police, nothing that was specific to protests and demonstrations.

He continually referred to the protocol relevant to cases of hazardous materials, explosion, fire, and building collapse yet nothing aimed at protest situations. “It is a general protocol but there is no criteria for action in the event of demonstrations,” Diego Fleitas, a consultant specialising in security issues, told Chequeado.com. Fleitas also said that as the general protocol was only a formal document, it was vital that it be supported by the supervision of political and judicial authorities while being carried out.

The Public Safety Act of Buenos Aires (law 2,894), however, outlines a number of measures which should be employed by police on duty. Article 27 states that physical force must only be used as a last resort, and that police personnel “must prioritise preventive and dissuasive tasks and procedures”. The article also explains that police must respect five principles at all times, which include approaching situations in a controlled and measured way. The use of firearms is discussed in article 28 of the same act, which reads, “(firearms) are only legitimate in the case of self-defence or situations of emergency and serious danger.”

City legislator Rafael Gentili, speaking after the Borda incidents, denounced that the actions of the Metropolitan police at the psychiatric hospital not only violated law 2,894, but did not meet the standards set out in the ‘National Protocol on the Use of Security Forces during Public Manifestations’, a protocol that most provinces subscribe to, except for the City of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, and Córdoba. Such guidelines mention that police must keep a minimum distance of 50m if firing weapons and keep  a reasonable distance from the protestors at all times, must point their guns to the ground -not at people-, must identify themselves, must engage in dialogue and negotiations with the protestors, and cannot arrest journalists, among other prescriptions. Gentili stated that none of these rules were followed, and that the Metropolitan police was “out of control and [acted] outside of the national protocols for security forces.”

Surrounded by Scandal

Controversy has followed the Metropolitan police since its creation in 2008, something that was made possible after then-President Néstor Kirchner and Mayor Aníbal Ibarra agreed to modify article 7 of the ‘Ley Cafiero’, a law that limited the autonomy the City of Buenos Aires was granted under the 1994 constitution in issues such as safety, justice, and transport.

Macri and Montenegro during the official presentation of the Metropolitan police in 2010 (photo courtesy of Buenos Aires City Government)

The force’s track record is fairly poor and many people have not been surprised by the scandal unleashed by their actions at Borda, especially given the other incidents of repression -mentioned earlier- in which they have been involved.

There have been suggestions that the aggressive nature of the police during protests may be related to the fact that a number of ex-Federal police officers have joined the Metropolitan police in recent years, bringing along with them the bad habits that in many cases caused their dismissal from the federal force.

Furthermore, legislator Julio Raffo of Proyecto Sur compiled a report in which he traces the origin of many Metropolitan police officers back to the military, something which is prohibited by law 2,894. He said, “5% (186 members) of the Metropolitan are, or were, part of the military. Of these, 76% (142 members) come from the Navy.” A decree, pushed through by Macri’s government, meant that ex-armed forces personnel were able to join if they occupied managerial positions. However, according to Raffo, 72% of these officers are in “operational positions”, ie., in the lowest ranks. The Metropolitan police has therefore been accused of roping in former soldiers whose military background and training may be incompatible with the principles outlined in the law. “Most of these men trained for war and for exterminating the enemy are now officers in contact with the neighbours in the street. In other words, Macri signed a decree that violates the Public Safety Law and doesn’t even respect his own decree,” said Raffo.

However, much of the police’s behaviour has to do with the directions they follow, rather than with individual conduct. In this sense, the leadership of the Metropolitan police has also been questioned. The first head of the Metropolitan force appointed by Macri was Jorge ‘Fino’ Palacios, who in 2001 was prosecuted for playing a role in the violent repression and murder of protesters, although later acquitted, and who is currently being prosecuted for his alleged involvement in a cover-up operation and for abuse of authority in the AMIA case.

Perhaps the greatest stain on his record though, was his involvement in the wire-tapping scandal that rocked the Metropolitan force. In 2009 Sergio Burstein, family member of an AMIA victim, stated in court that that the police were spying on him. Burstein was one of the leaders of the Jewish community who had campaigned against the promotion of ‘Fino’ Palacios to Chief of Police due to the accusations against him in the AMIA case.

Macri, Montenegro, and Giménez during the latter’s appointment as chief of police (photo courtesy of Mauricio Macri)

The resulting investigation concluded with Palacios, Deputy Police Chief Osvaldo Chamorro, and Ciro James, a Federal police lawyer working for the city’s Ministry of Education, prosecuted not only for allegedly spying on Burstein, but also on different members of the opposition (Macri himself is prosecuted for the latter). The government has vehemently denied the existence of a spy network, and Macri perceived the scandal as an attempt to discredit both the new police force as well as his 2011 bid for the Casa Rosada.

After Palacios was forced to resign, a civilian, Eugenio Burzaco, took charge of the Metropolitan police. However, Burzaco was removed in 2011 and again a former Federal police officer was named chief of the force. Horacio Giménez was forced to retire from the Federal police in 2011, after a purge of the force’s senior officers carried out by national Security Minister Nilda Garré following the Parque Indoamericano incidents.

These well-documented scandals together with the apparent lack of a specific protest and demonstration protocol do little to increase the popularity of the Metropolitan police force. The fact that the force, and its political leaders, refuses to recognise the need for a more measured approach may indicate that the brutal repression of demonstrations that have occurred in recent years looks set to continue.

What do porteños think of their police force and their recent intervention at Borda? Click here to find out.

In a landmark human rights trial that began on 19th March, former military dictator José Efraín Ríos Montt is facing charges of genocide and crimes against humanity in Guatemala. Ríos Montt is implicated for overseeing the majority of atrocities committed during the country’s 36-year civil war, during which he served as de facto president for a 17-month period after gaining power through a military coup in 1982.

The task of bringing Ríos Montt’s case to the justice system for mass crimes committed three decades ago has been hindered by countless setbacks -habitual suspensions due to constitutional and appellate court deliberations, death threats (and actual attacks) against those who uncovered evidence, an endless tug-of-war over the legitimacy and applicability of a void amnesty law from the 1980s, complications after evidence suggested links with the current Guatemalan president, and, as of late, defence complaints regarding evidence validity and representation rights.

However, as the bureaucratic hindrances fade away and real hearings begin, Ríos Montt’s trial marks the first time that a former head of state has ever been tried for genocide or crimes against humanity in a domestic court, a monumental move on the part of Guatemalan justice.

Background

Between 1960 and 1996 Guatemalan government troops clashed with guerrilla forces and targeted suspected sympathisers with the leftist-rebel cause: mainly indigenous groups of Mayan descent. After the war, national peace and reconciliation

A chart showing human rights violations in Guatemala from 1962-1996 (Source: CEH database) Click to enlarge.

commissions and the UN reported that about 200,000 people had died or disappeared throughout the conflict and thousands of others were systematically raped and tortured in governmental efforts to eradicate ‘subversion’.

A report from Guatemala’s Commission For Historical Clarification (CEH) indicates that nearly half of all human rights violations that occurred during the country’s civil war happened under Ríos Montt’s rule.

Ríos Montt’s plan to root out opposition, paralleled by other dictatorships of the era, was based on the idea that temporary dictatorial rule was the only way to reinstate order and control in a society that had been infiltrated by leftist ideologies and subsequently spiralled into chaos -whatever the initial costs may be. In this way, Ríos Montt developed his National Plan of Security and Development, a ‘scorched earth’ policy launched in 1982 that called for and justified persecution of suspected subversives to the point that they were not just pacified, but disappeared completely.

“There is no possible argument that recognises the ‘necessity’ of this horror,” says Latin American History professor Hugo Pomposo, of the University of Belgrano in Buenos Aires, who explains that this line of thought for justifying crimes and human rights abuses committed for historical ‘state interests’ is inexcusable, no matter how many years later.

Supporters of the genocide trial hope that with the initiation of case hearings those responsible for crimes committed in Guatemala in the name of ‘order and progress’ will be held accountable.

The Charges

Ríos Montt currently faces two separate genocide charges: the slaughter of 1,771 members of the Ixil population in Quiche between March 1982 and August 1983 and the displacement of nearly 30,000 others from the area, and an instance in Dos Erres in December 1982 in which 201 people were massacred. Both genocide charges also include allegations of ordered sexual violence and torture.

The ongoing trial solely regards the first set of charges, in which Ríos Montt is accused of approving and overseeing the completion of these acts and José Mauricio Rodriguez Sánchez, who served as chief of military intelligence under Ríos Montt, allegedly developed and implemented concrete military strategies to bring Ríos Montt’s vision to fruition -including hundreds of pages of documents that detailed secret killing missions.

High ranking military officers that served under Rodríguez Sánchez and Ríos Montt, like Oscar Mejia Victores and Héctor López Fuentes, are also implicated in the genocide cases, although charges have been suspended due to the health condition of the elderly defendants.

According to reports, the second genocide charge related to the Dos Erres is to be addressed in a later case.

The defence first aimed to block the genocide case from reaching the justice system altogether by using threats against those who brought about complaints, citing an outdated amnesty law, and taking advantage of Ríos Montt’s congressional immunity until last year.

After the case was finally brought to court, Ríos Montt’s lawyers have consistently asserted his innocence, as he never directly commanded soldiers to commit the crimes and never himself participated in the violence.

Case History

The Ríos Montt trial has a long and convoluted history outside of the hard to decipher crimes it seeks to confront.

A 1986 decree passed by Mejia Victores (who was president at the time and had served under Ríos Montt as defence minister, later overthrowing him in a coup) conveniently granted universal amnesty for those suspected of human rights violations and general war crimes between 1982 and 1986.

A cemetery in Rabinal, Guatemala where many victims of the Guatemalan civil war are buried. (Photo: Wikipedia)

Congress later deemed this move void in the 1996 National Reconciliation Laws, lifting the amnesty for perpetrators of crimes considered to be international human rights abuses. One year later, Congressional Decree 133-97 repealed all amnesty laws before 1996 (ie., Mejia Victores’ 1986 decree).

This amnesty law has been the key defence argument protecting Ríos Montt and Sánchez (as was Ríos Montt’s recently terminated protection under congressional immunity) and Guatemala’s Constitutional Court is still reviewing its applicability in the current trials.

After a group of Guatemalans brought the case to a court in Spain with international jurisdiction and no real developments resulted, in 2001 the Justice and Reconciliation Association joined with other Guatemalan members of civil society to file an official complaint with state authorities for investigations into the most heinous crimes of the 1980s. With this step, historical records started opening up to the public and charges of genocide and crimes against humanity developed for domestic hearings. Six years later, in 2007, Guatemala and the UN established an international body to oversee investigations and move prosecutions forward.

In 2009, nearly 50 years after the start of Guatemala’s civil war, trials began. Those in question were essentially the people on the ground while the human rights abuses were being committed: police officers, government soldiers, and paramilitary troops. Convictions were made in these initial proceedings, although the highest-ranking official prosecuted was a former police chief.

In a strange turn of events in 2011, Mejia Victores brought himself forward for investigations. However, months later his case was called off due to his deteriorating health. Similarly, Sánchez was arrested in that year pending genocide charges but was moved to a military hospital to await hearings.

Finally, on 26th January last year, a federal judge formally accused Ríos Montt of genocide and crimes against humanity, as the ex-dictator ended his congressional term and procedural immunity along with it.

Current Proceedings

In recent months, the genocide case has only become more complicated. On 28th January presiding Judge Miguel Angel Galvez declared that enough evidence had been presented for the trial of Ríos Montt and Sánchez to begin. A three-judge panel was set up to hear the case and 19th March chosen as the date for hearings to commence.

In February, Judge Galvez called for testimonials and evidence related to the case to be brought forward. He also opened previously classified state documents for investigation. During this time an article was added to the Guatemalan Criminal Procedural Code that allows for pertinent new evidence to be considered, even if presented after the beginning of the hearings, and allows for temporary trial suspensions under such circumstances to review new evidence.

Former Guatemalan dictator José Efraín Ríos Montt. (Photo: Wikipedia)

In the weeks leading up to the trial, the state’s Constitutional Court released a mixed decision concerning the 1986 amnesty law: it rejected the defendants’ claims that the law could call off the prosecution completely but continued considering a separate assertion that the law be taken into account in the current proceedings.

On 19th March the trial began, and within the first several hours Ríos Montt’s attorney Francisco Garcí was expelled from the courtroom after the judicial panel interpreted his request for more time to study trial records as an unnecessary and strategic move to postpone the trial even further.  Ríos Montt went on to assert that in this way his rights to representation were denied from day one of the proceedings.

Two weeks later, the Constitutional Court altered the protocol related to the presentation of evidence, rejecting Judge Galvez’s habit of deeming defence evidence useless or excessive. On 17th April the Supreme Court called on the appellate court to clarify the 1986 amnesty law issue. The next day, Judge Carol Patricia Flores (who had initially charged Ríos Montt with genocide, was later removed via recusal and only recently reinstated) annulled the trial until a decision was made.

This decision to call off the trial, which was later reversed, is the most important recent development in the case and raised international outcry. According to news agency Democracy Now! the decision to suspend the trial was two-sided, as it apparently also coincided with political interests of the current government.

Investigative journalist Allan Narin was set to testify as a ‘qualified witness’ in front of the judicial panel in the coming days, with first-hand evidence he gathered during the civil war years that reportedly implicated the current Guatemalan president, General (Ret.) Otto Pérez Molina, when authorities froze the case. Pérez Molina served as a military officer under Ríos Montt and represented the armed forces in the peace negotiations of the 1990s.

During the critical days when the international community was unsure of whether the trial would carry on at all, Sebastián Elgueta, researcher on Guatemala at Amnesty International said: “The consequences of this decision may set back the clock in Guatemala to a time when impunity was the norm for those types of crimes.”

The trial court, however, met briefly following the Flores move and decided that she had no authority to annul the trial. It did, however, decide to freeze hearings pending Constitutional Court approval, which came on 22nd April.

On the last day in April the court convened after a recess and Ríos Montt appeared before the judges with new representation, although the case was again halted after only two days so Sánchez’s public defender (also new to the trials) could prepare.

In the last few days, Guatemala’s Constitutional Court responded to several defence appeals and is still considering the amnesty question. On 2nd and 3rd May it announced that case judges could not decide which kinds of evidence to recognise and rejected Ríos Montt’s claims that he was denied proper representation at the start of the hearings.

The court was originally set to reopen proceedings yesterday. However, the Court of Appeals suspended hearings in an announcement late Monday night after it reviewed Ríos Montt’s complaints over his allegedly compromised representation and reinstated defence attorney Fracisco García. After receiving the news of García’s reinstallation, the court was allotted 24 hours to make a decision on how to proceed with the case. It should announce a plan for future proceedings today.

For supporters of the trial, it is hoped that proceedings will restart with momentum and that the court will make some ground before more complications spring up.

Protesters hold banners against Ríos Montt in Guatemala City, 2006 (photo courtesy of Wikipedia)

Implications

Ríos Montt’s trial has various potential implications. It represents a monumental step in the search for justice for the people of Guatemala and introduces what could be a groundbreaking initiative for tackling perpetrators of mass crimes on a national level.

According to Pomposo, “the case is a very significant advance against the impunity for the military dictators in all of Latin America, and of course also for Guatemala, which has suffered one of the most brutal military dictatorships of the ’70s and ’80s.”

Assuming that the trial is properly carried out to completion, the verdicts will undoubtedly carry historical significance and could set a precedent for future genocide cases. Furthermore, contextualised in a region where other figures like Ríos Montt appeared during the years of Cold War terror -many like Ríos Montt allegedly backed by the CIA and the School of the Americas- the Guatemalan case could also have international implications.

Pomposo adds that “it is undoubtedly true” that the Guatemala case, particularly with the charge of a former head of state with genocide, could be held as precedent in other Latin American countries where there exist historical “violations of human rights instrumented by innumerable military interventions that have come about by coup d’états often brought about in cooperation with the US.”

Although individuals responsible for war crimes and genocide are nearly impossible to pinpoint, and undoubtedly involve several if not thousands of accomplices, the Guatemala case marks one step forward in bringing about justice for victims of these atrocious crimes committed decades ago. The coming hearings (and the obstacles they may face) will reveal whether or not trying Ríos Montt and Sánchez for genocide is the way justice will be served.

Update: Ríos Montt was found guilty of genocide on 10th May, whilst Rodríguez Sánchez was acquitted. More information here.

For information about the case documented through personal stories, check out the ‘Granito: How to Nail a Dictator’ videos: http://granitofilm.com/granito/antonio

In the light of the current crisis concerning the Awás in Brazil, the Indy went out to get local opinions concerning the situation of indigenous people everywhere. We asked interested passersby to share with us their thoughts on the role that state governments play in protecting indigenous communities and their lands in South America.

In their comments, the locals we talked to seem to think that in Argentina and in general across the region state governments do address (or at least recognise) indigenous issues. However, most people added that they felt that governmental intervention too often falls short of providing any real form of protection for indigenous communities and that state meddling in indigenous affairs is often driven by broader political agendas and ulterior motives. Their answers seem to reflect the harsh reality of the status of indigenous people with respect to state protection in Brazil, a status that is often also lived in other parts of South America and all over the world.

Photos by Simon Guerra

Héctor Romero, 49, businessman, San Telmo.

I don’t think that the government is really concerned with indigenous people. They are not interested in the subject. The government doesn’t do much to protect them because that idea is not part of its political agenda. Furthermore, in general I think that the idea of the ‘Indian’ is changing -we live in a world that is changing. The image of those people today is not what it was in the past. They are now involved and integrated in schools, work, city life. So their issues are changing too.

Nahuel López, 23, factory employee, Mataderos.

From what I see in the papers, it seems like yes, the government is concerned with these issues and it does what it can to protect them; but in other papers, no, they don’t even report on that sort of thing. But yeah, I think they are doing at least some things to protect them in Argentina. And in Latin America, Evo Morales is doing a lot for the people. [Ecuadorian president Rafael] Correa as well, and with [Venezuelan president Nicolás] Maduro we’ll see what he does there in Venzuela. I don’t know too much about the issue but from what I see I don’t think that what the governments are doing is really sufficient [to protect indigenous people and their lands] but they at least do a little bit. Like here in Argentina they have land laws in place that help.

Matias Matison, 26, unemployed, Villa Lugano.

No, I don’t think what the governments are doing [in the region] is sufficient at all. Those people are basically ignored. I don’t know about in other countries but here it seems like the concern [the government] does give to those issues is superficial and it doesn’t give them a lot of importance. But what is it that they could or should do? I have no idea. That’s why I’m not involved in government. But I know that there are a lot of NGOs that work to do what they can for them, but in general, I mean you don’t see campaigns or anything that concern indigenous people -I believe they are ignored. I don’t know how it is in other provinces either, but here they are ignored.

Mariano Ferro, 26, systems analyst, Recoleta.

Well, I’m really not an expert on the issue, you know? But I think a lot of things are happening -like with the Qom community here in Argentina for example. And I don’t know how it is like in other countries with relatively large reservations with state lands so that the people are protected enough to live and develop their lives; but here, they create parks and areas for really small groups that survive generally by means of exporting goods and artisan crafts that they make themselves, especially in the north and northeast of the country. I think sometimes the situations [of indigenous peoples] are pretty poorly attended to. And although it seems like nowadays indigenous people have no problem integrating into society in general, I don’t know if they necessarily want to integrate themselves in this way. What the governments are doing in terms of protection of indigenous peoples is not sufficient. At least from what I know, there is no sort of state plan or program coordinated with the provinces to help with protection of such groups or to help these communities develop. Here in Argentina the indigenous groups are pretty marginalised, but in Central America where their populations are bigger, there are tremendous efforts being done to protect their rights. And in these countries where the indigenous populations are bigger their issues are more visible and I think they receive much more attention and help.

Florencia Piluso, 28, publishing editor, Palermo.

I think that [the state protection of indigenous people] is false and unreal in a sense. The attention given to these issues is not truly for the sake of helping or of integration of these groups, but rather a question of control. Everything [the government] does is to look for ways to approach these groups and draw them near into a sort of enclosure. And furthermore, indigenous communities are not included in daily societal activities. What happens, for instance, here [in Argentina] in the countryside of Chaco, such groups receive funds from the government but also serve as instruments for governmental use. In general I don’t think that a form of state protection in this sense really exists, nor does a genuine motive for helping them.

In March 2012, Brazilian judge Jirair Aram Meguerian ordered that the nation’s government had to evict all loggers and settlers working illegally in the demarcated region belonging to the indigenous Awá tribe within 12 months. Fourteen calendar pages have come and gone, and the government has still not completed a successful eviction. But the issue is still of utmost importance. Two weeks ago, coinciding with National Indigenous People’s Day, Brazilian aborigines occupied congress to protest a law that would give congress power in the demarcation of tribal lands. Furthermore, the quandary facing the Awá people is at a crux, and if changes are not made soon, the tribe may face extinction.

Awá Indians on the road built illegally through their land by loggers, Maranhão state, Brazil (photo by Uirá Garcia/ Survival)

The failure to carry out the evictions simply marks the latest obstacle in a long series of misdoings against the Awá, deemed the world’s most endangered tribe by human rights NGO Survival International. Despite the area they inhabit being demarcated as a protected region in 2005, after a two-decade battle for such a distinction, these illegal loggers continue to threaten the existence of the Awá people, both by destroying the forests that constitute their home and by using firearms against the indigenous people they come into contact with. The tribe is believed to be numbered at about 360 people, with roughly 20% more thought to be living without contact with the outside world. Without increased action by the Brazilian government, the chances of the Awá of avoiding the fate of countless other persecuted tribes, of becoming little more than footnotes in a history book, look bleak.

The Tribe

Located in four regions within the western half of the Brazilian state of Maranhão, the Awá people -a group of nomadic hunter-gatherers- are marked by a deep connection with the natural environment they inhabit.

Awá tribe members are known to have many pets, including boars, vultures, and coatis (relatives of the raccoon). It is even common for Awá women to breastfeed animals such as capuchins, howler monkeys, and small pigs, and coatis are known to share hammocks with the Awá. In fact, many families have more pets than they have children. And while animals such as monkeys are a source of protein for the Awá, the hunters try to avoid killing animals they recognise as former pets released into the wild.

“When we find a baby animal, we want to look after it,” an Awá woman called Parakeet told Survival International. The names of Awá people change throughout their lives as more suitable titles arise. “When [the animals] are older, they become independent and go back to the forest. Sometimes when we’re out hunting, I’ll see one of our pets and say, ‘don’t hunt it!’ I would never eat an animal we raised. We looked after it, we watched it grow. If I ate it I would feel terrible. I can hear the howler monkey that used to be my pet singing in the forest. My pet lives in the forest, and now it’s going to make a family of its own.”

Baby monkeys spend much time with Awá women and children enjoying the physical contact. Many monkeys like to sit on their owners’ heads (photo by D Pugliese/ Survival)

The Past

The troubles faced by the Awá people date as far back as the 1950s when ranchers and loggers approached their territory after the construction of road BR322. A major threat to the tribe materialised in 1967 when large deposits of rich iron ore were found in the hills of Carajás, which lie to the west of the four regions occupied by the Awá. This resulted in the installation of the Great Carajás Project, a series of dams, smelters, and cattle ranches — and, in 1985, a railway — funded by the US, Japan, the EU, and the World Bank. The project decimated the area’s forests and just 14 years after the discovery of iron ore in the area, Brazil’s National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) reported that over half of the 56 indigenous people contacted in 1976 had died.

The Awá people live in the north-western state of Maranhão, Brazil.

In the following decades, organisations such as Survival, FUNAI, the Indigenous Missionary Counsel (CIMI), the Coordination of Indigenous Organisations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB), and the Pro-Indian Commission of São Paulo have pressed for increased protection of the indigenous population, calling for Awá demarcation as early as 1985. The Brazilian government was lethargic in its response. In 1999 the government noted 240 cases of illegal occupation in the Awá region, and in 2005 the territory was officially demarcated by the state as a tribal territory, thanks in part to a petition submitted by Survival International. Meanwhile, the logging and ranching industries continued to threaten the Awá’s survival with assaults against the environment and acts of violence against the indigenous people.

By 2010, about one-third of the area occupied by the tribe had been destroyed, and experts deemed the situation genocidal, a characterisation that is still held by advocates to this day.

The Present

Currently, the Awá face more danger of extinction than ever. In 2012, FUNAI released evidence that the illegal loggers were but 3km away from the Awá’s location. While the government failed to act on Judge Meguerian’s orders, the Awá’s sustainability remained in jeopardy. The tribesmen are now afraid to hunt, because they do not want to be seen by the loggers or ranchers and put themselves at risk of being killed.

As roads increasingly spring up in the territory, another great fear is that the invaders will encounter uncontacted Awá tribe members. It is believed that they would have severely adverse reactions to the loggers and ranchers because of their lack of interaction with the outside world. “A common cold could kill them,” states Survival.

According to Survival, “there are several accounts of [uncontacted aborigines] being killed by loggers and ranchers, but there is no recent confirmed data and encounters are not reported.” Survival has recorded video footage of loggers illegally occupying the area, but were unable to take action as the loggers are typically armed.

“It’s not too late for the Awá, but it soon will be,” said Stephen Corry, director of Survival International. “It is entirely within the Minister of Justice’s capabilities to evict loggers, but he must act today. If he doesn’t, tomorrow the Awá will be gone.”

The charred remains of burned forest on Awá land, only several kms from an Awá community (photo by Survival)

The failure to reach the deadline for evictions should result in daily fines for FUNAI, said Alice Bayer, spokeswoman for Survival International, but she thinks it is unlikely that they will actually be paid.

“The situation is clear cut: the invaders are illegal and must be removed,” Bayer said. “The solution is simple and plans are already in place. They now need to be put into action before they become useless ideas that were implemented too late to save lives.“

The Misconception

While it is possible the Brazilian government has dragged its feet in matters regarding the protection of Amazonian tribes simply due to lack of urgency, there are signs of an ideologically based belief that the tribes are simply undergoing an inevitable and necessary assimilation into Western society.

One politician who has espoused such beliefs is senator Katia Abreu.

“Who benefits from [increased protection of the indigenous groups]?” Abreu asked. “Not our country, which today enjoys the best and cheapest food in the world and boasts of being the globe’s second-largest food exporter…. Neither do the Indians (sic), who as their numbers show don’t need more physical space, but sanitation, education and an efficient health system. They need, in short, a better life, like all of us.”

Bayer denounced that view.

“The view of Senator Abreu stems from a position of racism, which sees the life of self-sufficient tribal peoples as ‘backward’,” she said. “She seems to be proposing that tribal peoples would be better off if they joined mainstream society. But we have seen time and time again that the forced integration of tribal peoples into the mainstream can have devastating consequences, often leading to addiction, disease, and dependency on government handouts.”

Survival made a strong push to fight such ideology with its ‘Progress Can Kill’ report, released in 2007. The report notes how assimilation into “progressive” cultures often ravages the lives of those in indigenous communities, commonly leading to maladies such as alcoholism, suicide, starvation, obesity, and sexually transmitted diseases, if not all-out extinction.

A family take a break during a walk in the forest to collect açai fruits (photo by Survival)

Survival also confronts the opinion, raised within the Brazilian political sphere too, that the case of the Awá cannot be deemed genocide, as hundreds of lives are at stake, not thousands or millions: “Apart from [the number] having no relevance in law, such an interpretation discriminates against Amazon Indians (sic) who are numerically small.”

The Campaign

Survival International launched a new campaign to protect the Awá in 2012, including a short film depicting the troubles the tribe is facing as well as a detailed and interactive website that cites the reasons that governmental measures are necessary and educates readers on the Awá people. Academy Award-winning actor Colin Firth narrates the short film and has worked as an advocate for the cause, hoping to raise international awareness of the issue.

Thus far, over 50,000 letters have been sent to Brazilian Minister of Justice José Eduardo Cardozo, who is the focus of the campaign and who is addressed by name by Firth in the video. The campaign’s Facebook page sports 34,000 likes, and the organisation also provides an opportunity to donate money to support the cause.

Survival has been involved with the case of the Awá since as early as the 1950s when one of its founders, Francis Huxley, went to the area and did research regarding the uncontacted aborigines. The organisation has continually petitioned the government to address the issue in the decades since and has published various reports on the Awá’s crisis, in addition to the ‘Progress Can Kill’ report. The organisation is funded primarily by small donations, as it does not accept money from any governments in order to avoid political influence.

The Hope

The works of the Survival campaign have not resulted in an effective governmental eviction of the illegal loggers and ranchers, but support and awareness has increased for the cause around the world. Actors like Firth and Gillian Anderson have raised awareness, Brazilian football supporters have taken on the cause as the 2014 World Cup approaches, and the ‘awáIcon’ logo has popped up worldwide in photographs and as street art to support the cause.

The AwaIcon, used in Survival’s campaign.

And while the Brazilian government still has a long way to go in terms of protecting the Awá tribe, it did ratify the International Labour Organisation’s Convention No. 169, an international law created in 1989 that secures land rights for tribes. Brazil is one of only 22 countries to ratify the law, although there have been questions as to whether or not it is actually being followed. Furthermore, the nation ratified “the genocide convention, which imposes a duty on the state to investigate and prosecute if genocide is suspected,” per Survival International.

However, the most inspiring bit of hope in the Awá narrative may lie in the story of a man named Karapiru. In 1978, his community of uncontacted Awá people were attacked by a gunman. He escaped, and spent the next ten years in complete isolation. Eventually he was found, and, because the attending anthropologist was unable to understand Karapiru’s language, members of various tribes met with him in hopes of finding a linguistic connection. Finally, he met with an indigenous man named Xiramuku. As The Atlantic’s Joanna Eede reports, “Not only could Xiramuku understand Karapiru’s language, but he used one specific Awá word that instantly transformed Karapiru’s life: he called him ‘father’.” Karapiru was reunited with the Awá people and integrated back into their culture; a miraculous, storybook ending.

The beacon of hope that lies in storybooks, however, is threatened by the sawmill of colonialisation found in history books. If drastic efforts are not made by the Brazilian government to heed the plight of the Awá, hope might be all that tribesmen like Karapiru have left.

“I hope the same things that happened to me won’t happen to my daughter,” said Karapiru, according to The Atlantic article. “I hope she will eat lots of game, lots of fish, and grow up to be healthy. I hope it won’t be like in my time.”

Do people believe indigenous people in the region are being sufficiently protected? Click here to find out.

Nearly one month after record flooding struck Buenos Aires and La Plata, the water is receding but outrage and confusion remains. The storms that caused at least 59 deaths and damaged countless homes have left many citizens to wonder how the ordinary occurrence of rain escalated to such tragedy.

Although April’s disaster was one of the worst in the last century, floods in Buenos Aires are not infrequent, and people are now demanding investigation into the structural and environmental factors that cause the effects to be so severe.

Severe flooding in La Plata as seen from space (Photo courtesy NASA/GSFC/METI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team.)

The Flood

On the night of 2nd April, more than 400 millimetres of rain fell in the province of Buenos Aires in just two hours, causing severe flooding in at least 21 towns. La Plata, the capital city, was the most affected, with at least 48 of the deaths, including a member of Abuelas de Plaza de Mayo. Here, water reached heights of over 1.5 metres and many people were trapped on rooftops overnight, waiting to be rescued.

In the days following the storm, more than 2,500 residents were evacuated from their homes, and the city remained in chaos with very little drinkable water and 600,000 people without power. After problems with looting arose, 400 extra police officers were placed in the city.

However, citizens feel the response was a failure.

“In our neighbourhood, where 700 families live, the police never came,” Sandro Barrios, from the Los Hornos neighborhood in La Plata told newspaper Perfil.com. Meanwhile, in Buenos Aires, on 17th April, hundreds of residents of Coghlan, Mitre, Villa Urquiza, Saavedra, Parque Chas, Villa Cerini, Nuñez, and Villa Pueyrredón gathered in front of the local governments’ headquarters to protest.

“We are tired of living in fear. Every time the clouds come, we expect the worst,” said one protestor. “[The government] knows where we are and we want answers.”

Citizens, experts, and government officials are all working to determine contributing factors to what some call a “constructed flood”, and attempting to move forward as the water recedes.

Rushing water in the streets of Buenos Aires (Photo: Beatrice Murch)

A City Made for Mishap

The metropolitan area of Buenos Aires, as well as the city of La Plata, are built on part of a large natural region called the ‘Pampa’ lowlands, with a climate distinct from other parts of Argentina. The temperature, atmospheric pressure, humidity and wind speed, and amount of precipitation are all specific to this region, and experts say that urbanisation has exacerbated the already intense climate, which experiences higher levels of humidity, rain, and flooding.

As economist Antonio Brailovsky explains in his book ‘Buenos Aires, ciudad inundable’ (‘Buenos Aires, a floodable City’), the Buenos Aires city faces unique climate challenges, as it has become what is called an “urban heat island”.

“Because of the materials the city is made of, it is capable of conducting heat three times faster than outside the city,” he says. “The cement absorbs and reflects heat much more efficiently than in natural land.”

This condition is worsened when smog keeps the air from escaping through the atmosphere above the city, increasing the heat and humidity. Water particles easily stick to the solid microparticles in the polluted air, causing levels of precipitation to be 10% higher in Buenos Aires than in the countryside.

“Without a doubt, this tendency to produce more precipitation is clearly associated with human-made modifications to the urban atmosphere,” Brailovsky says.

Many believe environmental disasters that are aggravated by urban development will worsen with global warming. Buenos Aires Mayor Mauricio Macri cited this hypothesis in his response to the flooding, telling channel TN: “What is happening now is the product of climate change. Now more than ever we have to commit to a green agenda with a view to reducing [greenhouse] gas emissions.”

2007 Nobel Peace Prize winner Osvaldo Canziani, who is on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, told publication La Prensa that recent studies support this theory.

“The urban heat island has changed the environment and can influence rain in the area. The city is filled with cars, most of the new buildings function without gas, and air conditioning is used more and more,” he said. “All of this uses electric energy and the combustion increases temperature, condensation, and causes more intense rains.”

“Buenos Aires is adopting qualities of a tropical city,” he added.

Canziani says another contributing factor to flooding is the reduction of the number of green spaces that naturally absorb the rain.

“Sixty years ago the topography of Buenos Aires was characterised by cobblestone streets and houses with gardens. When it rained, the ground absorbed nearly 40% of the water. But the construction of buildings makes the ground impermeable” he says. “Water runs off the roads leading to the sidewalk and into the street,” he says, adding that poor construction “compounds the situation”.

Brailovsky told La Prensa that the floods were “a slowly constructed tragedy.”

“We cannot point to a specific politician for what happened, but to decades of corruption where politicians knew certain zones were susceptible to flooding, but still permitted houses and buildings to be built there,” he said.

Flooding in the neighborhood of Belgrano during a severe storm. (Photo: Beatrice Murch)

He referenced neighbourhoods like Villa Crespo, which is built close to waterway Arroyo Maldonado, and floods year after year. He said that to avoid these problems, many countries have developed rules against construction in flooding-susceptible areas. For example, France prohibits construction in areas with more than 75% chance of flooding.

Brailovsky said Buenos Aires, whether through poor planning or government corruption, was unable to keep up with the enormous population growth of the early 20th century, and is unprepared for flooding, despite its frequency.

“The government needs to face this problem from a very basic level, like by changing the urban planning code, marking the zones of risk and from here, factoring in factors like climate change,” he said. “It’s crucial that the people outraged by the floods turn that anger into an effort to work together and call officials’ attention urban policies. It is not too late.”

Political Implications

Following the floods, politicians quickly scrambled to point fingers at one another, and with 98% of the population reportedly saying the government, not nature, was responsible for the extent of the flooding, there was plenty of blame to go around.

Mayor Macri implied that President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner’s administration was to blame, citing the halting of a US$120m World Bank loan that would have been used to channel one of three underground rivers in the capital. Federal planning minister Julio de Vido accused Macri of not sufficiently preparing the city for the storm, which was forecast by the national weather service 48 hours in advance.

Leandro Bullor, an analyst at the University of Buenos Aires, told Christian Science Monitor “the city government’s bad management is a grave problem.” According to reports, the city government had US$45 million budgeted towards flood prevention works last year, but only spent 5% of that. In 2013, that budget was cut even more, from US$45 million to US$5 million.

Macri was criticised for being in Brazil on holidays when the storm struck and for taking several days to return to the water-damaged city of Buenos Aires. La Plata mayor Pablo Bruera, who was also in Brazil at the time, angered citizens by tweeting that he was “checking on evacuation centres” in La Plata when in reality, he had not yet returned from vacation.

When officials came to survey the damage -including Buenos Aires governor Daniel Scioli, social development minister Alicia Kirchner, president Fernández, Macri, and Bruera – they were booed and ushered away. “Go away” and “You came too late!” the crowd yelled.

Many politicians are now hurrying to appease constituents with talks of reform, but it is unclear if this is a legitimate promise.

Looking Forward

Volunteers at Universidad Nacional de La Plata work to make alcohol gel to help keep people clean (Photo: Patricio Lorente)

While politicians bicker over what is to be done, plenty of volunteer citizen groups are working hard to get victims back to a semblance of normal daily life.

In both La Plata and Buenos Aires, people are struggling to recuperate the estimated 55,716 homes affected by the flood. More than 22,500 tons of trash was collected, and people in the area say that a large quantity of trash remains in the streets. Abandoned vehicles rest throughout the city, unclaimed. As a precautionary measure, 60,000 people were given anti-flu and other vaccines following the floods. The government is offering subsidies for items lost in the disaster, but it isn’t enough. In one of the more touching events following the disaster, 20 pets lost in the flood were reunited with their owners last week.

Citizens are on the way back to their standard daily routines, but will Argentina ever find a permanent fix to its flooding problem?

Although it seems some government entities are stepping up to change the system that caused this tragedy, angry citizens remain unconvinced reforms will stick. As Martín Lousteau, a former economy minister, said in La Nación: “With every new tragedy, we forget about the last one.”

In the recent anti-government protests, the floods were a hot topic, with many signs reading “Corruption kills!” towering over the crowds. Scioli has asked that municipalities revise their urban planning codes, and various government entities under investigation to find who is ultimately responsible for the effects of the April floods. With inevitably more rain to come in the next few months, Argentines are skeptical, but hopeful, for change.

What do porteños think about the way the flooding was handled? Click here to find out.

On the beginning of April, a torrential downpour hit the greater Buenos Aires area. La Plata was hit especially hard, and 51 deaths were reported, in addition to six in the city limits of Buenos Aires. Many have said that the infrastructure was not properly prepared for such a storm. City mayor Mauricio Macri was among those who lambasted the national government for failing to take measures to improve the sewage infrastructure, however he was not exempt from criticism himself. The Indy took to the streets to see what porteños had to say about this tragedy.

Guido Gazzoli, 58, journalist, Recoleta.
Unfortunately the matter of La Plata is something that is really connected with the political situation of this country, where if you think the opposite, if you have a different idea about the government, you are an enemy. They didn’t give money to develop the project for avoiding what happened in La Plata. And this is a very simple question with a very simple answer… The matter is that this country is absolutely ill with not respecting different ways of thinking. It is practically an oligarchy. Totally. If you check Argentine history you will discover that whoever got the power first of all eliminated the enemy. The political enemy. Then, if we’ve got time, we can also think about doing something for the country. If they could carry out all the projects that they designed… but unfortunately if the government doesn’t push money to the municipality of Buenos Aires, they can do nothing. Without money, you can come up with a lot of projects in your mind, but if the projects are not carried out, the situation will stay the way it is. It’s absolutely clear for everybody why it happened. God intervened, of course, because climate change is incredible all over the world, but human beings played the other part. For instance, in Buenos Aires, for four years we tried talking about a tunnel to send the water into the Rio de la Plata. It’s still a design made by Walt Disney.

Adolfo Sarabia, 73, lawyer, Recoleta. 
I think it’s a grave error by the people that they did not make the investments that they should have. If they had made investments, there would not be a flooding; but they did not make investments, so there was a flooding. If they had made the investments, they would have spent the money on that [instead of on recovery efforts]. The government has been negligent, sure. Of course. The government should make some changes, but I’m not convinced, because I do not yet trust the people that are representing the people. I do not trust this government. I want the works to get done but I do not believe that someone is going to do it. I want them to at least get started.

Beatriz Acuña, 43, stay-at-home mother, Palermo. 
It is regrettable but there are also many factors when it comes to climate. Argentina is not prepared because it has never had these problems. There is a terrible negligence. I don’t know anyone directly, but the parents of a friend of mine were affected. They lost everything. I don’t think that it could have been avoided, but many people could have been saved and there did not have to be so much destruction. There have to be changes now with this, for prevention’s sake. But we’ll have to see because here the funds that are meant for investment do not go to the investment of the country.

Mateo Rodriguez, 24, waiter, Lanús. 
It was a very big storm, and I don’t think it has anything to do with the government. I think that there has to be political help but it was a big storm. If the drains can’t take it, they will fail as well. It was a problem they were not reconstructed, but it was more the fault of the storm. I don’t [want to see changes to the drain system]. Yes, there were people at fault. This happened over a long period of time. Not only the current government, but past governments as well. There is not a project with a long-term aim. It’s not that I don’t care about it, but there is not going to be a solution in the near future. Further along, maybe, but right now? No.

Veronica Orsi, 26, photographer, Belgrano. 
The material losses and losses of life were terrible, but there was practically no response by the politicians and the people responded, and to me this is the most valuable thing. I worked with Fundación Sí. I did what I could from home and I collaborated with the foundation to help load trucks and separate clothing. I think the problem here is that money for public works was never well distributed previous [to the storm]. We have sewers from 1900 and the climate situation is not like it was back then. So it’s complicated that there’s not public investment. But the truth is that the storms that they had are so bad that they would have to demolish some of Buenos Aires and the surrounding areas [to make the changes], so it’s really complicated to be honest. There should have been foresight on the part of the state, but there definitely should have been remedies from the state and there weren’t. I don’t think that there will be many changes because it is an exclusively climate-related issue that needs a lot of public investment in order to restructure the drains of all the city and of La Plata also. There should make a multimillion investment and there was not money to pay the teachers, so if there’s no money for health and for education, then infrastructure is going to come in last place. We have a serious problem. We have to restructure the entire sewer system.

Last Thursday night, the fervour of a section of Argentine society could be felt and heard in every corner of the country. Thousands of light blue and white flags fluttered in the skies of the main cities, creating the impression of a civic holiday, though it was the claim of more than a million indignant citizens.

Buenos Aires Thursday 18 April, thousands of peaceful demonstrators
(Photo: Julie Catarinella)

The streets, crowded with people chanting against ten years of rule by president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and her late husband and former president Néstor Kirchner, were swamped with demands and allegations that resonated in the handmade banners and loud sounds of pot banging.

“I’m tired of corruption. I’m tired of not being able to to go outside without being afraid. I’m tired of public officials getting richer at the expense of our people. I’m here to defend democracy”, said a 65-year-old housewife.

Their grievances included alleged corruption, violent crime, inflation, and poverty -concerns which have seen the president’s approval rating plummet almost two years after she easily won her bid for re-election (according to several consulting agencies, in the last half of 2012 her positive image had already fallen by 45%). After all, it was Argentina’s largest anti-government demonstration in years and the third mass protest against the president in seven months.

Buenos Aires Thursday 18 April, peaceful demonstrators
(Photos: Julie Catarinella)

One of the demonstrators’ main concerns was about a new judicial reform which, among other things, states that all members of the Magistrates’ Council, a body that oversees the selection and running of the judiciary, ought to be elected by the citizens. While supporters say the law will lead to a democratisation of the justice system, critics say it will dangerously politicise the judiciary ensuring impunity to members of the ruling party.

It is hard for a group of people to come together behind a single banner. The claims were numerous and diverse, and some of them resonate with the government’s electoral base. Most of the participants of this protest were not voters of Kirchnerism, however some of their grievances, such as inflation and insecurity, are also claims made by voters of the current government.

Scenes like these are bound to raise concerns for the president and her supporters, and the reason is the transversal nature of the complaints.

Last Thursday there were neighbours from affluent suburbs, rural workers from the countryside, leaders and members of the Independent Movement of Pensioners and Unemployed (MIJD), the Socialist Workers’ Movement (MST), young people in school uniforms, retirees in wheelchairs and walking sticks, and diverse groups of people from all around the country, united by their rejection of the government. These were the indignant social players of the so-called ’18A’, strongly proud of not being part of the 54% who voted for president Fernández in 2011, demanding to be heard.

No one can fail to admit the impact of the ‘cacerolazo‘, especially in districts historically controlled by president Fernández’s party, such as the Greater Buenos Aires, Mendoza, Salta, Tucuman, and Neuquén. In previous demonstrations, on 13th September and 8th November 2012, government supporters had dismissed the protest by pointing out that protesters belonged to the middle-upper classes and that the demonstrations were orchestrated by wealthy elites. There was also speculation that some media groups were responsible for stoking fears and encouraging the protest. As the judicial reform has been a hot topic in the news agenda, some media groups aligned with the opposition directly linked this issue with the 18A protest, which gave the event massive coverage and placed it on the spotlight.

This time, the main government officials refrained from comment. They feel this message is not addressed to them.

Buenos Aires Thursday 18 April,peaceful demonstrator
(Photo: Julie Catarinella)

The feature that differentiated the third cacerolazo against the government from the previous ones was the visible presence of opposition political leaders. On 13th September, when the pots were heard against the government for the first time, opposition politicians were conspicuous by their absence. Two months later, on 8th November, only some were audacious enough to attend. Last Thursday, however, the key figures of the opposition took to the streets and heard the people’s demands. After all, many of them admitted to having articulated the protests.

“The right of the majorities is not absolute nor can it be fulfilled at any cost. The president must govern for all citizens. We also want justice, we also want security, we also want a better quality of life,” explained Mauro, a 33-year-old engineer.

A crucial test of the government’s popularity will come later this year in the mid-term legislative elections, in which the government will try to keep its majority in both chambers. For the time being, the government pushes ahead with major bills.

The Responsibility of the Opposition

In the two previous cacerolazos, it came to light that certain opposition groups had provided support to the organisation of the protests, though with a low profile and no party identification.

Marked by the predominant influx of people not aligned with any political party, the novelty of ’18A’ was the strong and explicit role of political leaders of most of the opposition parties.

The demands of unity between the opposition candidates for an alternative option ahead of the elections were also part of the people’s claims at the demonstration. One of the organisers argued that the opposition parties should unite to form at least two electoral fronts, a right-leaning and a left-leaning one, to avoid fragmentation and confront the ruling party in the legislative elections next 27th October.

Some opposition sectors are beginning to come together to replicate the model of the opposition in Venezuela, based on an alliance of all left and right-wing parties to confront the ruling party in the polls. The aim of this alliance, the Mesa de Unidad Democrática (MUD), is to carry out primary elections, run together, and support the candidate who obtains the highest number of votes. But here in Argentina, not all believe in unity. Some socialist groups differ with right-wing parties in the way they analyse a possible new victory of Kirchnerism -they just do no think the risk is that high.

The wide gap between the various opposition forces has been very difficult to bridge so far and it might take too long before an alliance like the MUD in Venezuela can arise and develop a cohesive discourse.

It becomes evident that from now on the calls to these anti-government manifestations will be more orchestrated by these groups, and less ‘non-partisan’. This may affect future gatherings, given the explicitly ‘non-partisan’ stance of the protesters.

“No political party represents me so far, I don’t identify with any of the existing political platforms. I hope the opposition can come up with something new for the next elections. I still wanted to come and express my disappointment with this government,” said Susana, a 37-year-old shop-keeper.

On the ruins of the bipartisan system that ruled Argentina between 1983 and 2001, the government developed a hegemony that is based more on the lack of an alternative than on the trust of the popular vote. In recent years we have seen how opposition parties have been weakening because of their inaction against the power of Kirchnerism. The street protest reflects the other side of their supremacy in the arena of partisan politics. It expresses an ongoing discomfort at an opposition without organisation or discourse, and a ruling party that does not recognise the needs and predicaments of great part of society.

The political dispersion of the minority was evidenced in the 2011 election and resonates today in the form of a widespread dissatisfaction with the current political actors. Responsibility for this dissatisfaction falls on the intellectuals and politicians who are not articulating people’s demands into concrete, democratic, and autonomous actions.

Buenos Aires Thursday 18 April,peaceful demonstrators
(Photo: Julie Catarinella)

The open cacerolazos are an enigma in terms of their ultimate implications in the polls. The challenge for the opposition is to be able to translate the slogans seen in these protests into a parliamentary victory and later on, an electoral victory. Whether they achieve this will depend on the strength of their unity and their ability to evolve into a new political project able to represent this part of Argentine society.

A lot has been said about democracy over the past few days. The protesters denounce president Fernández for exceeding the limits of democracy towards a greater accumulation of power, while her allies state that the ’18A’ is the glaring realisation that there is full democracy in Argentina.

It is important to bear in mind that democracy in Argentina, as well as in most Latin American countries, is often expressed through strong personal leaderships. The strong presidential system in Argentina does nothing to alleviate the problem of a lack of representation in Congress. Without a strong opposition to ensure a fair political game, the government’s concentration of power will continue growing, to the point of jeopardising democratic consolidation.