4.          EVENTS IN JESHUA 

                  4.1.    The military version maintains that when "Grass" patrol reached Jeshua, at approximately 17:30 hours, it was the target of a surprise attack by around 30 subversives with firearms and homemade grenades.  The attack lasted about 45 minutes. 

                  At that point, the assailants scattered in various directions.  The patrol suffered no casualties, but the ambushers left behind 6 bodies of their own men,* as well as one light automatic rifle (which had been stolen at Erusco), a Civil Guard submachine gun, three packages of dynamite, two sacks of munitions, 4 bloodstained military blankets and subversive propaganda. 

                  The military version goes on to say that the 6 bodies were neither fingerprinted nor buried, because the patrol was in pursuit (General Valdivia to the Commission).  The report prepared by the Office of the Inspector of the Army asserts that the assailants were townspeople from Cayara; however, it does not give the grounds for its assertion. 

                  The next day, as said before, the soldiers allegedly returned for the bodies left behind in Jeshua.  When it did not find them, it concluded that the subversives had taken them out of the area. 

                  However, the report filed by "Otorongo" patrol states that upon arriving at Cayara at 11:00 hours on the 15th, "two women," the only people it says it found, told them that the day before there had been "shots and explosions" in Jeshua.  The report goes on to say the following:  "As I descended the ravine (of Jeshua)... I proceeded to comb the area, and found blood and mounds of earth in the form of barricades as well as areas where the soil had been disturbed, which seemed to be graves, probably dug by the subversives."  If we bear in mind that "Grass" states that it took an hour and a half to reach Jeshua by road, this discovery by "Otorongo" should have been at around 12:30 or 13:00 hours on the 15th. 

                 The Commission finds here a significant gap in the military version.  While it asserts that on the afternoon of May 15 there were crude graves in Jeshua and an on-site inspection (see point 4.2) 8 days later confirmed this, "Grass" patrol asserts that on the afternoon of the 15th, they found no trace of the bodies that it had left behind.
 

                 The Commission further maintains that the military version of the subversives gathering up the bodies is somewhat shaky.  The area was saturated with military patrols, making it highly unlikely that senderista forces were present.  The armed forces were, predictably, present in superior numbers, better organized, better armed and better equipped in terms of transportation, than any possible opposition.  The Commission believes that risking a confrontation with superior forces would have been inconsistent with the logic of subversion. 

                  4.2.    The record of the inspection conducted in Jeshua by the Judge of Cangallo on May 22 (8 days later) in the presence of the Inspector for the II Military District, Lt. "Grass" and the Special Prosecutor, contains the description of that ambush that Lt. "Grass" gave during the inspection.  According to that account, the soldiers -- who were on the path in the ravine at Jeshua some 3 or 4 kilometers from Cayara -- were attacked from the front, from both sides of the pathway (sic), without any of them being wounded. 

                  However, that same document notes that "in the middle of the path, there is a stain...what seems to be a blood stain, and two blocks from that point (where the attack began), there are what appear to be human blood stains in the middle of the pathway" (sic).  The inspection also found traces of at least 5 graves, which could not be opened "because it was too late in the afternoon" (sic). 

           The Commission maintains that this inspection raises very reasonable doubts about the military version of the events in Jeshua:
 

           a.   The blood stains were found on the pathway, in other words, precisely where -- according to the military account -- the soldiers were (who suffered no casualties) and not where the attackers were located or where their bodies were found (see point 4.1).  If we accept the military version, those blood stains could not have belonged to either the soldiers or the senderistas.  This reinforces the civilian witnesses' version:  that as they were returning home, the victims were intercepted and killed.
 

           b.   Furthermore, the discovery of the remains of five graves contrasts with the version given by "Grass" patrol to the effect that it found no trace of the bodies when it returned to Jeshua. 

                  4.3.    Around 14:00 hours, the Cayara townspeople who were in Jeshua decided to return home and set out in a group.  When they reached the place known as Jecchuapampa, they were stopped by soldiers (many of whom were on horseback).  They were told to separate into three different groups (men, women and children).  The men were made to lie face down, while the other two groups were told to sit down away from the men.  The soldiers tore down cactus leaves and crushed them into the backs of the men with the soles of their boots.  As they did this, they interrogated them about the ambush the night before and about what had happened to the "20 light automatic rifles."  They then ordered the women and children to get out, firing shots into the air to make them run. 

                  While the women and children were still present, they began to kill the men, using the tools that the farmers had been carrying with them (testimony given by Marco Antonio Taquiri Infante, Ciro Hayo Huayanay, Fernandina Palomino Quispe, Delia Ipurre Noa and Valeriana Ipurre Marcatoma de Apari).  One of these was Dionicio Suárez Palomino. 

                  According to the civilian account, only one of the 21 tenant farmers survived, Magdaleno Gutiérrez Huamán; he sought shelter in the home of Mrs. Magdalena Marcatoma de Ipurre.  When the house was entered the next day, the soldiers killed both of them.  Their bodies were buried in the farm fields outside Jeshua (Senator Díez Canseco to the Senate May 20, 1988).* 

           The Commission maintains that, as in the case of Cayara, more than one patrol participated in the Jeshua operations; the "Huayacán" patrol was at least one of them, as it was the only mounted patrol that was mobilized in the area. 

          5.          THE EVENTS AT MAYUPAMPA 

                  5.1.    "Grass" patrol stated that after Jeshua, it headed for the town of Mayupampa.  It arrived at 4:00 a.m. on the morning of the 15th and entered at dawn.  Some of the houses had been burned, "possibly only a few hours before." 

                  The "Huayacán" patrol also says that it arrived in Mayupampa at 6:30 a.m. on the 15th.  The patrols do not state that they had worked jointly; however, putting the two patrol reports together, both would have been in Mayupampa at the same time. 

                  "Huayacán" states that when it reached Huamanmarca, the town was abandoned.  There it found only two army blankets and 500 dynamite cartridges.  It further maintains that on May 15, as it was crossing the Pampas river en route back to Mayupampa, it was attacked by 20 or 25 subversives who, when repelled, fled.  Some of the subversives were wounded and two of them were killed, though no one came back for their bodies.  The soldiers, on the other hand, lost only one mount and a light automatic rifle. 

                  Later, "Huayacán" states, it was sent to Cayara on May 18, to guard the town.  It remained there until May 19, at which point it was replaced by "Naranjo" patrol (Report filed by Huayacán Patrol).  

                  5.2.        The civilian witnesses state that after Jeshua, the soldiers set out for Mayupampa, where they killed four peasants:  Ernestina Félix Palomino, Lucía Choccña Oré, Luis Echeccaya Naupe and Valentín Jerónimo Naupe.  There had been no clash nor any other motive for the killing. 

           The Commission notes that the following information can be drawn from the military version of the events of May 14 and 15: 

           A. Subversive casualties:  a total of 18 dead, not counting the wounded. 

                    Erusco:        4          buried at the site (Roble and Tarántula) 

          Cayara: 1 at the entrance to the town who was not buried, and whose body later disappeared (Grass)

          5 in the town church who were not buried and whose bodies later disappeared (Grass)

          Jeshua: 6 bodies that were not buried and later disappeared (Grass)

          Rio Pampas: 2 bodies taken away by the subversives (Huayacán) 

           B. The military patrols were ambushed twice during the course of operation "Persecución."  One ambush occurred at Jeshua, the other at the Pampas river.  Despite all this, the patrols suffered no casualties -- neither deaths nor wounded.
 

           C. The CSB at Cayara was set up on May 18 and since then the military presence has been constant. 

          VI.  CONCERNING THE DISAPPEARANCE OF THE BODIES AND OF OTHER PERSONS WHOSE NAME APPEARED ON THE LIST 

                  1.        The townspeople of Cayara said that on May 25, the soldiers ordered them not to come out of their houses and that the soldiers loaded the corpses from Jeshua on horses and set out in the direction of Hualla (testimony from Paulina Gonzáles Cabrera). 

                  2.        On May 18, General Valdivia came to Cayara and summoned the townspeople.  According to what he told the townspeople, he had with him the  letter from the informant which, he he told them had been found in the pocket of a senderista who had been killed at Erusco.  He called everyone whose name appeared on the list.  Alejandro Echeccaya Villagaray (50) and Samuel García Palomino (18) responded from among those present.  Later, he asked the townspeople if the others lived in town and was told that they did. 

                  3.        The next day, May 19, the soldiers detained Alejandro Echeccaya, his wife Delfina Pariana Palomino, Samuel García and Jovita García Suárez (26), a cousin of Samuel García and pregnant at the time.  These people had their homes in Erusco and the home of Jovita García Suárez was alongside the road.  All of them were taken to the town school where around 30 other townspeople were being held.  The wife of Echaccaya was held until the next day, Friday May 20, when the soldiers released everyone being held, except for Echaccaya and the two García cousins. 

                  That same day, six soldiers took Jovita García to her home, where she was seen by her sister Zózima García.  The soldiers ordered the latter outside while they conducted a search.  After that they took Jovita García back to the school.

          Shortly thereafter they released her but did not return her personal documents; she reportedly sought refuge in the home of her aunt Lucia Bautista Sulca, also located in Erusco.  That same night, May 20, the soldiers dragged her from there and took her, along with two other detainees, in the direction of a place called Yarccapampa.  According to the wives of the two men, who followed some distance behind, the soldiers made the detainees carry hoes, mats, blankets and bags. 

                  When they reached Yarccapampa, they spent the night in the house of a tenant farmer by the name of Julio Torres, and left at 5:00 a.m.  Delfina Pariona and Juana Apari Oré (the wife of Samuel García) followed them as far as a place called Chaupiccata, where they heard shots. 

                  When combing the area later, at a place called Pucutuccasa the two women found underwear, a blanket and other Articles of clothing, together with the tracks of soldiers.  Terrified, they did not return until one month later, at which point they found a grave that they partially uncovered, and found that it contained the remains of the three people who had been detained. (The testimony of Flavia García Suárez, Juana Apari Oré and Martha Crisóstomo). 

                  In Pucutuccasa on August 10, Prosecutor Carlos Escobar, Dr. César Carlos Amado Salazar, Lower Court Judge of Cangallo, the Secretary of that Court, Vidal Canales Quispe, and Elvia and Justiniano García Suárez (sister and brother of Jovita García) located the bodies of the three and "in the deepest part the soles of the feet of another human being, indicating that there...might have been other bodies" (sic Exhumation Report).  The presence of these relatives is on record in the exhumation report and in photographs, one of which was published in the December 26, 1988 edition of the magazine "Si." 

                  However, because it was difficult to disinter and transport all of the bodies, only the body of Jovita García was exhumed and taken to the Cangallo morgue.  There it was identified by another relative, Martha Crisóstomo, a fact recorded in the presence of the Special Prosecutor.  The body was then buried in the Cangallo cemetery, but would eventually disappear from its grave. 

                  When the same team, accompanied by a group of experts, returned to Pucutuccasa on August 19, the other bodies had disappeared. 

                  The autopsy report on the body that was retrieved showed that it was a woman approximately 30 years old and in roughly the seventh month of pregnancy. 

                  The army then maintained (Communique No. 014/CCFFAA and General Valdivia to the Commission on September 22, 1988) that Jovita García Suárez was an army informant, which was why the Sendero kidnapped her from the town on May 20, as had been reported by a group of townspeople.  The grave that was found would therefore be that of the Sendero Luminoso and not the army. 

           The Commission finds this version untenable, for the following reasons:
 

           a)   There are at least two witnesses who were present at the time the three townspeople were kidnapped and taken somewhere near Pucutuccasa (the wives of the two men).
 

           b)   The body of Jovita García was identified by, in all, three relatives.  Moreover, the two relatives who took part in the exhumation also recognized the other two missing persons.
 

           c)   The hypothesis that Jovita García was an army informant and that the Sendero Luminoso kidnapped her, is at odds with the fact that her body was found together with two people whose names appeared on the list that the army had of alleged senderistas.
 

                 Moreover, the Commission believes that the subsequent disappearance of the bodies, both at Pucutuccasa and at Cangallo, could only be an attempt to thwart the identification of the body of Jovita García and conceal the obvious inconsistency noted in point c) above. 

                  3.        In Huamanga in early July, relatives filed a complaint to the effect that on the night of June 29 to 30, army soldiers posted at Cayara had kidnapped Gregorio Ipurre Ramos (who had been on the informant's list; his house had been burned down on May 14 and he was one of the Special Prosecutor's witnesses) and his relatives Humberto Ipurre Palomino, Benigna Valenzuela Palomino, Catalina Ramos Palomino and Guzmán Bautista Palomino (a janitor at the school whose name also appeared on the informant's list). 

                  For its part, the army has maintained that on that day various townspeople of Cayara reported the kidnapping of 14 townspeople by a group of 10 subversives who had raided the town the night before.  They reportedly provided the following list: 

          1.          Humberto Ipurre Palomino
          2.          Gregorio Ipurre Ramos*
          3.          Benigna Valenzuela Palomino
          4.          Guzmán Bautista P.*
          5.          Catalina Ramos
          6.          Demetrio Meza
          7.          Julio Ipurre Palomino
          8.          Griselda Palomino de Ramos
          9.          Félix Gonzales Palomino
        10.        Justiniano Tinco García*
        11.        Agapito Ipurre Palomino
        12.        Crispín Oré Crisóstomo
        13.        Serapio Huamán Crisóstomo
        14.        Julio Torres Díaz 

        (Those with asterisks alongside their names were also on the informant's list). 

                  The Commission notes that the first five were those who disappeared the night before.  Also on the list is Justiniano Tinco García, whose name appears on the informant's list as well.  The Commission further notes that the scene of the events, the house of Gregorio Ipurre, is but a short distance from the military barracks; moreover, at that point in time, there were orders not to move about at night and a system of civilian watches.  All this raises doubts about the military version and leads one to believe that this is an attempt to cover up the arrest and forced disappearance of these people. 

        4.  Later, on July 3, citizens Raúl Apari Suárez, Emiliano Tello, Victoriano Apari, Román Hinostroza Palomino and Mauro García Palomino were arrested by soldiers from the Pampa Cangallo base.  The army acknowledged the arrest of only the first of these people, whom it released shortly thereafter; on the other hand, the last three were on the informant's list. 

        5.  Some months later, on December 14, in Toccto, which is 35 kilometers from Ayacucho, the truck driven by Antonio Félix García Tipe, one of those who drove the townspeople of Cayara to Canaria, was stopped by a group of armed men.  The men ordered Justiniano Tinco García (one of the people on the list) and Fernandina Palomino Quispe (one of the principal witnesses) to get off the truck.  They killed them with a barrage of submachine-gun fire.  They tied García Tipe to the bottom of the truck and blew it up with a grenade. 

        VII.    ON THE CONDUCT OF THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE JUDICIARY 

        1.  To investigate this case, the Attorney General of the Nation appointed the Special Prosecutor in Ayacucho for Investigating Cases of Disappearances, Carlos Escobar Pineda, who had also received complaints from relatives in the city of Ayacucho. 

        2.  Further, on May 20, the Special Prosecutor and the Judge of Cangallo, attempted to conduct an on-site inspection of the scene of the events. Before they could reach Erusco, however, they were fired on from above; they were unable to see their assailants.  However, the army told them that the assailants were subversives (the version of General Valdivia to the Commission of Deputies). 

        3.  The inquiry conducted by Special Prosecutor Carlos Escobar was obstructed systematically by the Political-Military Command of Ayacucho, by not providing him with the transportation to Cayara that he required to conduct his investigations. 

        At the beginning of his inquiry, the Investigating Police had provided him with a one-man escort, which was shortly thereafter taken away without any explanation.  Later, this Special Prosecutor would receive death threats, in which he was described as an attorney for the Sendero Luminoso and ordered to leave Ayacucho.  The Political-Military Command offered him no protection. 

        4.  Prosecutor Escobar completed his report by holding General José Valdivia Dueñas responsible for the crime of "murder with extreme cruelty" in the case of Jovita García, Alejandro Echaccaya and Samuel García; for crimes against individual freedom; abuse of his authority in the case of the townspeople of Cayara, and for a crime against the administration of justice in detriment to the State.  After this report was delivered to the Attorney General of the Nation, Hugo Denegri, the latter cancelled the Office of Special Prosecutor for Investigating Cases of Disappearances, which had been operating since July 1987; he did so under the pretext of budgetary constraints, which have never been made explicit. 

        5.  The report was sent to the Cangallo Provincial Prosecutor, Dr. César Arnao Salazar, so that the investigations might be expanded.  This magistrate confined himself to taking new statements from the witnesses, but within the army headquarters at Cangallo.  Under these conditions, some of the witnesses retracted their initial statements.  The Commission has no knowledge of the present status of this file. 

        6.  On December 2, 1988, persons unknown detonated an explosive charge at the door of the home of the Judge of Cangallo, who had participated in proceedings with Prosecutor Escobar and who would have been called upon to preside over any legal proceedings in this case.  A written threat was left there, signed by "Commander Rodrigo Franco." 

                  The Commission maintains that the thoroughness and swiftness of the investigations conducted by Special Prosecutor Carlos Escobar prevented the loss of information that is valuable in shedding light on the facts, and he did this despite the adverse circumstances under which he discharged his functions.  The Commission further maintains that his actions were within the authority and power accorded to the Public Prosecutor's Office under the Constitution and its Statutes.

        VIII.  THE GOVERNMENT COMMISSION SENT TO CAYARA 

                 On May 21, 1988, in response to the serious denunciations made, a Commission appointed by the President of the Republic and consisting of the Minister of Justice, the President of the Lima Bar Association, Monsignor Augusto Beauzeville and the Minister of Defense, arrived in Cayara in an army helicopter, accompanied by General Valdivia.  At the very same time, a group of deputies and Senator Díez Canseco were trying to get there overland. 

                 This Commission testified that it found the town under absolute military control and that it was not permitted to have a fluid exchange with the few people whom it saw.  However, one group of townspeople approached to hand it complaints of a mass murder committed by soldiers; they even gave the Minister of Justice a list of 28 people who had been murdered. 

                 Three women told them that "the bastards had killed their husbands," a version that, according to Monsignor Beauzeville, hhad the ring of truth.  They also reported that the army had killed close to 23 people in Jeshua and not in a clash as had been reported earlier. 

                 This Commission also received a complaint concerning the burning of the homes of Gregorio Ipurre, Dionicio Suárez Palomino and a third townsperson, and a complaint concerning the presence of an informant who had supplied the army with slanderous information.  However, the Commission confined itself to going from the esplanade where the helicopter had landed to the church; it did not go through the town or even to the town hall, which is immediately in front of the church. 

                 This visit was filmed by Government television and would be staged in an arbitrary fashion calculated to substantiate the Government's version, which denied the complaints. 

                 When touring the area of the ambush, where the four dead subversives had been buried, this Commission did nothing to verify the facts; moreover, they said that they did not see any physical signs or note any odor of decomposing bodies.  General Valdivia seemed anxious to dig up the graves immediately, but Dr. Ferrero Costa, President of the Bar Association, objected on the grounds that the Examining Magistrate and medical expert were not present. 

                 This Commission did not go to Jeshua, even though it was obvious that they had the means available to do so (the army merely flew them over the area in a helicopter) and even though they had just been told that that was where most of the deaths occurred. 

        IX.         THE CONGRESSIONAL TRIP TO CAYARA 

                 In the meantime, the Congressional Commission, accompanied by representatives of human rights organizations and journalists, arrived at Ayacucho at 7:00 a.m.  The military commanders refused to provide them with air transportation, overland transportation or any form of protection.  At 5:30 p.m. the Investigating Police supplied them with a vehicle and an escort, and they reached Cangallo at 9:30 p.m.  Accompanying them were the Special Prosecutor and medical experts, who had also been denied any assistance in the form of transportation. 

                 On May 21, at 5:00 a.m., they left Cangallo and shortly thereafter were stopped at the bridge over the Pampas river for 3-1/2 hours.  The people from the human rights organizations and the journalists were not allowed to continue. 

                 When they reached the CSB at Huancapi, a Peruvian army major identified as "Yauyos" held them back, saying that there was a clash with subversives in progress and that they would be in danger.  They were finally allowed to move on, but the medical experts were held back.  However, this supposed clash was supposedly occurring precisely when the Government Commission was in Cayara. 

                 This last hold-up prevented the two commissions from meeting in Cayara.  Moreover, because the medical experts were not allowed to pass, the graves at Erusco and Jeshua could not be opened. 

        XII.     CONCLUSIONS REACHED BY THE COMMISSION (THE MINORITY) 

                 1.         The actions subsequent to May 14 occurred as an immediate and direct consequence of the attack on a military convoy that had happened the previous day, not far from Cayara.  The military response had a three-fold purpose: 

                 a.         To provide direct support to the troops who had been ambushed, which was accomplished immediately with the withdrawal of the survivors. 

                 b.         To track the subversives, in an attempt to wipe them out and recover the weapons, which continued up until May 15. 

                 c.         To punish the townspeople, who were regarded as subversive sympathizers and even active subversives, and to search for certain people whose names were on a list that the army had in its possession even before it entered Cayara. 

                 2.         The existence of that list of alleged subversive sympathizers, which the army had in its possession, is the single thread running throughout a sequence of crimes designed to wipe out all subversives, especially those people whose names appeared on the list that military intelligence had obtained; although it began on May 14 in Cayara, this sequence of crimes continued with the arrests and disappearances on May 19, June 30, July 3, and finally, the murder of Fernandina Palomino, Justiciano Tinco and Antonio García Tipe on December 14, while another element was the disappearance of the body of Jovita García Suarez. 

                 3.         Based on the testimony of the witnesses, the remains found by the special prosecutor when the graves were dug up, and the gaps and contradictions in the information supplied by the Ministry of Defense, the Commission concludes that on May 14, 1988, the Military Command ordered an operation to track down and wipe out subversive forces, which culminated in a punitive action against the people -- especially the men -- of Cayara, for their alleged participation in the ambush of May 13.  That punitive action involved the indiscriminate slaughter of dozens of civilians and the arrest and disappearance of others. 

                 4.         The Commission has found evidence pointing to the fact that during the operation, noncombatant civilians were murdered, as in the case of the deaths that occurred on May 14 at Erusco, at the entrance to the town of Cayara, and later the four people who died at Mayupampa. 

                 5.  The Commission maintains that the army has been unable to prove that the people of Cayara participated -- either in the subversion and/or in the ambush -- in the manner suggested by the conclusions that appear in the report of the Office of the Inspector of the Army, even though it supposedly had what it needed to substantiate its version, such as fingerprints taken from the bodies at Erusco or the documenteary evidence and munitions recovered in Cayara and Jeshua. 

                 6.         The Commission rejects as unrealistic the premise that the disappearance of the bodies is attributable to the subversives and concludes that because of the complaints that began on May 17, and more specifically as of Prosecutor Escobar's request for army support to go to Cayara to dig up the graves, a request made on May 25, the army dug up the bodies and got rid of them in an attempt to destroy all the evidence of the massive crime. 

                 7.         Information is being deliberately withheld, in violation of Articles 179 and 180 of the Constitution since: 

                 a.         The complete report of the investigation conducted by the Office of the Inspector of the Army and its appendices has never been provided; only its conclusions. 

                 b.         The results of the fingerprints taken from the four bodies found at Erusco have never been revealed. 

                 8.         The Commission concludes that in planning and executing the military actions that began on May 14, Division General José Valdivia Dueñas, Chief of the Political-Military Command for that area under a state of emergency, had direct and final responsibility. 

                 9.         The Commission has found evidence indicating that on May 19, citizens Jovita García Bautista, Alejandro Echeccaya and Samuel García were detained by the army and later abducted.  It also concludes that the subsequent location of their bodies creates the evidence that indicates that the killers were the military troops who took them out of Cayara.

                 10.         The Commission maintains that the only plausible explanation for the final disppearance of the body of Jovita García was that it was an attempt to make it impossible for a court of law to find that she died at the hands of her captors. 

                 11.         The Commission has found evidence to conclude that on June 30, citizen Gregorio Ipurre Ramos and his relatives were taken by army troops, and so discounts the version that they were abducted by a group of subversives. 

                 12.         The Commission concludes that the other complaints alleging that civilians were murdered during the course of these events, of which Prosecutor Escobar found unidentified remains, should be investigated and clarified by the Public Prosecutor's Office. 

                 13.       A deliberate and unremitting effort was made to obstruct the investigations conducted by Special Prosecutor Carlos Escobar Pineda; the Political-Military Command of Ayacucho failed to help him perform his functions. 

                 14.         The events investigated have turned up evidence of the perpetration of crimes classified under our system of common criminal law, which can in no way be interpreted as military crimes; it is therefore the duty of the Office of the Public Prosecutor to investigate those crimes and for the judiciary to punish them. 

                 15.         The Commission concludes that the crimes investigated cannot be divorced from the general atmosphere of the counter-insurgency policy of the present government.  In this context, the forces of law and order are employing unlawful coercion, such as torture or threat, for obtaining intelligence.  These methods are part of a warfare logic whereby entire communities are viewed as the enemy.  The only relationship the State continues to have with these communities is one of coercion. 

                 16.         The Commission notes that, unfortunately, the criticism that it is making today is precisely the same criticism made by the Senate Commission that investigated the incidents at Pucayaccu and Accomarca back in October 1985, at the start of this administration.  This only goes to show that the change in government did not bring about any change in the antisubversive policy.  

        Unless the Senate demur. 

        For notification.  Commission Room. 

        Lima, May 9, 1989 

                           (Signed) JAVIER DIEZ CANSECO CISNEROS
                                        Senator of the Republic

[end of Díez Canseco Report]