Part Four, Chapter Four (D): From Madness to Hope: El Salvador: Truth Commissions: Library and Links: U.S. Institute of Peace

On 24 March 1980, the Archbishop of San Salvador, Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdámez, was assassinated while celebrating mass in the Chapel of the Hospital de la Divina Providencia.

1. Former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson gave the order to assassinate the Archbishop and gave precise instructions to members of his security service, acting as a "death squad", to organize and supervise the assassination.

2. Captains Alvaro Saravia and Eduardo Avila, together with Fernando Sagrera and Mario Molina, were actively involved in planning and carrying out the assassination.

3. Amado Antonio Garay, the driver of former Captain Saravia, was assigned to drive the gunman to the Chapel. Mr. Garay was a direct witness when, from a red, four-door Volkswagen, the gunman fired a single high velocity .22 calibre bullet to kill the Archbishop.

4. Walter Antonio "Musa" Alvarez, together with former Captain Saravia, was involved in paying the "fees" of the actual assassin.

5. The failed assassination attempt against Judge Atilio Ramírez Amaya was a deliberate attempt to deter investigation of the case.

6. The Supreme Court played an active role in preventing the extradition of former Captain Saravia from the United States and his subsequent imprisonment in El Salvador. In so doing, it ensured, inter alia, impunity for those who planned the assassination.

On Monday, 24 March 1980, the Archbishop of San Salvador, Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdámez, was celebrating mass ³⁷⁸ in the Chapel of the Hospital de la Divina Providencia ³⁷⁹ when he was killed by a professional assassin who fired a single .22 or .223 calibre bullet from a red, four-door Volkswagen vehicle. The bullet hit its mark, causing the Archbishop's death from severe bleeding.

Monsignor Romero had become a well-known critic of violence and injustice and, as such, was perceived in right-wing civilian and military circles as a dangerous enemy. His sermons deeply irritated these circles because they included human rights violations produced by the Archdiocesan Legal Aid Office.

As a result, members of the Government and the armed forces viewed his actions as favouring subversives.

Newspapers criticized him in unequivocally hostile terms, such as "... a demagogic and violent Archbishop ... (who) preached terrorism from his cathedral ...", ³⁸⁰ or "... the armed forces should begin to oil their weapons (...)". ³⁸¹

In his sermon on 17 February 1980, he expressed opposition to United States military aid to El Salvador, pointing out that "(...) neither the (Government) Junta nor the Christian Democrats govern this country. Political power is in the hands of the armed forces which are unscrupulous in their use of this power. They only know how to repress the people and defend the interests of the Salvadorian oligarchy (...)". ³⁸²

That same month, he received death threats ³⁸³ and therefore decided that his colleagues should not accompany him when he went out, so as not to expose themselves to unnecessary risks. ³⁸⁴ On Monday, 10 March, the day after he had celebrated a mass for Mario Zamora, assassinated on 23 February, ³⁸⁵ an attaché case was found near the High Altar behind the pulpit, ³⁸⁶ which the Explosives and Demolition Unit of the National Police found to contain a bomb that had failed to go off. ³⁸⁷

In his sermon on Sunday, 23 March, the Archbishop appealed to Salvadorian soldiers themselves: "... I beseech you, I beg you, I order you, in the name of God, to stop the repression!". ³⁸⁸

The investigation to determine who was responsible for the Archbishop's assassination was not only inefficient but also highly controversial and plagued by political motivations. Some of the main elements which the Commission took into account in its own investigation are described below.

The National Police went to the Chapel of the Hospital de la Divina Providencia to gather evidence. They did not do this properly, however, since they failed to collect material evidence of the crime at the scene.

Atilio Ramírez Amaya, the Judge of the Fourth Criminal Court, gave instructions for the Salvadorian Polyclinic to perform an autopsy on the prelate: a small entry wound barely 5 millimetres in diameter in the right thorax indicated the point of entry of the bullet. It had fragmented without exiting the Archbishop's body, causing fatal internal bleeding. Three fragments of the bullet were extracted for further study. ³⁸⁹ Judge Ramírez Amaya maintained that the bullet used must have been a .22 or similar. ³⁹⁰ Going by the weight of the fragments, the National Police confirmed that the bullet was a .22 calibre but did not reach any more precise conclusions. ³⁹¹ Following an attempt to assassinate him at his home on 27 March, Judge Ramírez Amaya tendered his resignation and left the country. ³⁹²

On 7 May 1980, in a raid on the San Luis estate in Santa Tecla, 12 active and retired military personnel and 12 civilians, ³⁹³ including former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson, who had gathered there were arrested and formally accused of plotting to overthrow the Government by means of a coup d'état. ³⁹⁴

The documents seized during the raid included a "List of accusations made by a South American informant against Monsignor Oscar Arnulfo Romero, Archbishop of San Salvador. Informant is prepared to provide filmed and written evidence within a period not exceeding 15 days", ³⁹⁵ a diary belonging to former Captain Alvaro Rafael Saravia and two lists of names of commanders and officers (of the Salvadorian armed forces). ³⁹⁶

The "Saravia Diary" contained various important pieces of information concerning the assassination of Monsignor Romero. It referred to purchases and deliveries of large quantities of arms and ammunition, some of which, based on the ballistic study made by Judge Ramírez Amaya, were of the type used in the assassination. ³⁹⁷ In addition, several names which appeared over and over again in the diary were of people concerning whose involvement in planning, carrying out or covering up the assassination the Commission has already received sufficient evidence. ³⁹⁸ Other details include the name "Amado" - Amado Garay, the driver assigned to drive the assassin - and receipts for petrol purchased for a red vehicle used by former Captain Saravia.

A third document, entitled "General Framework for the Organization of the Anti-Marxist Struggle in El Salvador", reflected the approach and objectives of the San Luis group. Their goal was to seize power in El Salvador and their political plan provided for "direct action", so-called "activities of combat networks", including "attacks on selected individuals". ³⁹⁹

None of the documents seized at the San Luis estate was made available to the Judge of the Fourth Criminal Court, and it was only years later that the court gained access to a copy of the diary. The Judge's efforts to locate the original diary proved unsuccessful.

In March 1984, former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson appeared on television during the presidential election campaign and showed a recording of an alleged FMLN commander, "Pedro Lobo", confessing to having been an accomplice in the assassination of Monsignor Romero. Almost immediately, "Pedro Lobo" was identified as a common criminal who had been in prison from 1979 to 1981. ⁴⁰⁰
He said that he had been offered US$ 50,000 to claim responsibility for the assassination. ⁴⁰¹ Former Major D'Aubuisson nevertheless continued to insist that the guerrillas had assassinated Monsignor Romero, ⁴⁰² and officially the armed forces continue to hold to this position. ⁴⁰³

The Commission for the Investigation of Criminal Acts (CIHD) began its investigation into Monsignor Romero's assassination in January 1986. ⁴⁰⁴

In November 1987, Amado Antonio Garay, one of the San Luis detainees and former Captain Alvaro Saravia's driver revealed that on 24 March 1980, Saravia had ordered him to drive a red Volkswagen to the Hospital de la Divina Providencia in the Miramonte district. He had parked opposite the Chapel. His passenger, a bearded stranger, had ordered him to crouch down and pretend to be repairing something. He had heard a shot, turned around and seen the individual "holding a gun with both hands pointing towards the right side of the rear right window of the vehicle (...)". He had immediately smelt gunpowder and at that moment the bearded man had calmly told him: "drive slowly, take it easy" and they had driven off. ⁴⁰⁵

Garay alleged that he had driven the individual to former Captain Saravia, to whom the stranger had said "mission accomplished". Three days later, Garay had driven Saravia to a house where former Major D'Aubuisson was and Saravia had said in front of D'Aubuisson: "We've already done what we planned about killing Monsignor Arnulfo Romero". ⁴⁰⁶

The Attorney General's Office presented Garay to make a statement to Judge Ricardo Alberto Zamora Pérez on 20 November 1987. Based on the description of the gunman provided by Garay ⁴⁰⁷ and the investigation of places mentioned by the witness, ⁴⁰⁸ on 24 November the judge ordered the arrest of former Captain Saravia ⁴⁰⁹ and officially requested the Central Board of Elections to certify the status of former Major D'Aubuisson as a member of the Legislative Assembly, the first step towards requesting that his parliamentary immunity be withdrawn and that he appear in court. ⁴¹⁰

Saravia filed a writ ofhabeas corpus, on which the Supreme Court took a year to rule. In December 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that "(...) the aforementioned testimony (of Garay) is invalid (...) the witness made his statement seven years, seven months and 24 days after the event about which he is testifying, (which) makes his testimony lose all credibility (...)". It also took the view that the Attorney General did not have the power to request extradition. ⁴¹¹

CIHD made other investigations. Garay picked out a 1969 photograph ⁴¹² of Mr. Héctor Antonio Regalado with a beard drawn in as being closest to his description of the gunman. After Saravia, Regalado had been responsible for D'Aubuisson's personal security. ⁴¹³ When he appeared before the Commission, Regalado denied having fired the shot. CIHD found no convincing evidence that he had participated in the assassination.

Former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson, former Captain Alvaro Saravia and Fernando Sagrera ⁴¹⁴ were present on 24 March 1980 at the home of Alejandro Cáceres in San Salvador. Captain Eduardo Avila arrived and told them that Archbishop Romero would be celebrating a mass that day. Captain Avila said that this would be a good opportunity to assassinate the Archbishop. D'Aubuisson ordered that this be done and put Saravia in charge of the operation. When it was pointed out that a sniper would be needed, Captain Avila said he would contact one through Mario Molina. Amado Garay was assigned to drive the assassin to the Chapel.

The parking lot of the Camino Real Hotel was the assembly point before proceeding to the Chapel. There, the bearded gunman, carrying the murder weapon, got into a red, four-door Volkswagen driven by Garay. At least two vehicles drove from the Camino Real Hotel to the scene of the crime. Outside the main entrance to the Chapel, the assassin fired a single bullet from the vehicle, killing Archbishop Romero. D'Aubuisson ordered that 1,000 colones be handed over to Walter Antonio "Musa" Alvarez, who received the payment in question, as did the bearded assassin. Alvarez was abducted in September 1981 and was found dead not long afterwards.

1. There is full evidence that:

(a) Former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson gave the order to assassinate the Archbishop and gave precise instructions to members of his security service, acting as a "death squad", to organize and supervise the assassination.

(b) Captains Alvaro Saravia and Eduardo Avila, together with Fernando Sagrera and Mario Molina, were actively involved in planning and carrying out the assassination.

(c) Amado Antonio Garay, the driver of former Captain Saravia, was assigned to drive the gunman to the Chapel. Mr. Garay was a direct witness when, from a red, four-door Volkswagen, the gunman fired a single high velocity .22 bullet to kill the Archbishop.

2. There is sufficient evidence that Walter Antonio "Musa" Alvarez, together with former Captain Saravia, was involved in paying the "fees" of the actual assassin.

3. There is sufficient evidence that the failed assassination attempt against Judge Atilio Ramírez Amaya was a deliberate attempt to deter investigation of the case.

4. There is full evidence that the Supreme Court played an active role in preventing the extradition of former Captain Saravia from the United States and his subsequent imprisonment in El Salvador. In so doing, it ensured, inter alia, impunity for those who planned the assassination.

The Commission on the Truth received a great many complaints of serious acts of violence allegedly perpetrated by death squads. The direct testimony received concerns a total of 817 victims of abductions, disappearances and executions that occurred between 1980 and 1991. ⁴¹⁵

There is no question that what have been classified as murders committed by the death squads in rural areas account for a significant proportion of all killings in El Salvador between 1980 and 1991. The Commission on the Truth has obtained extensive information from the testimony of many witnesses, including several members of the armed forces and civilian members of the death squads, who admitted and gave details of their involvement at the highest levels in the organization, operation and financing of the death squads.

The undeniable impact of the extensive evidence received about the death squads leads us to share the fervent conviction of the Salvadorian people that it is crucial not only to comprehend the scope of this phenomenon in El Salvador but also to inform the international community about what it was that, by commission or omission, caused the death squads to insinuate themselves so perniciously into the formal State structure. Decisive action is needed to root out this infamous phenomenon that has so grievously compromised human rights.

Between 1980 and 1991, human rights violations were committed in a systematic and organized manner by groups acting as death squads. The members of such groups usually wore civilian clothing, were heavily armed, operated clandestinely and hid their affiliation and identity. They abducted members of the civilian population and of rebel groups. They tortured their hostages, were responsible for their disappearance and usually executed them. ⁴¹⁶

The death squads, in which members of State structures were actively involved or to which they turned a blind eye, gained such control that they ceased to be an isolated or marginal phenomenon and became an instrument of terror used systematically for the physical elimination of political opponents. Many of the civilian and military authorities in power during the 1980s participated in, encouraged and tolerated the activities of these groups. Although there is no evidence of latent structures for these clandestine organizations, they could be reactivated when those in high Government circles issue warnings that might trigger the resumption of a dirty war in El Salvador. Since the death squad phenomenon was the problem par excellence of that dirty war which ultimately destroyed all vestiges of the rule of law during the armed conflict, the Salvadorian Government must not only be ready and willing to prevent the resurgence of this phenomenon but also seek international cooperation in eradicating it completely. ⁴¹⁷

El Salvador has a long history of violence committed by groups that are neither part of the Government nor ordinary criminals. For decades, it has been a fragmented society with a weak system of justice and a tradition of impunity for officials and members of the most powerful families who commit abuses. At the same time, it is a country with little land, a large population and tremendous social tensions. All this has helped create a climate in which violence has been a part of everyday life.

Violence has formed part of the exercise of official authority, directly guided by State officials. This has been reflected, throughout the country's history, in a pattern of conduct within the Government and power élites of using violence as a means to control civilian society. The roots of this situation run deep. In the past 150 years, a number of uprisings by peasants and indigenous groups have been violently suppressed by the State and by civilian groups armed by landowners.

A kind of complicity developed between businessmen and landowners, who entered into a close relationship with the army and intelligence and security forces. The aim was to ferret out alleged subversives among the civilian population in order to defend the country against the threat of an alleged foreign conspiracy. When controlling internal subversion became a priority for defending the State, repression increased.

There were several stages in the process of formation of the death squads in this century. The National Guard was created and organized in 1910 and the following years. From its inception, members cooperated actively with large landowners, at times going so far as to crack down brutally on the peasant leagues and other rural groups that threatened their interests.

Local National Guard commanders "offered their services" or hired out guardsmen to protect landowners' material interests. The practice of using the services of "paramilitary personnel", chosen and armed by the army or the large landowners, began soon afterwards. They became a kind of "intelligence network" against "subversives" or a "local instrument of terror".

In other words, from virtually the beginning of the century, a Salvadorian State security force, through a misperception of its true function, was directed against the bulk of the civilian population. In 1932, National Guard members, the army and paramilitary groups, with the collaboration of local landowners, carried out a massacre known as "La Matanza", in which they murdered at least 10,000 peasants in the western part of the country in order to put down a rural insurrection.

Between 1967 and 1979, General José Alberto Medrano, who headed the National Guard, organized the paramilitary group known as ORDEN. ⁴¹⁸ The function of this organization was to identify and eliminate alleged communists among the rural population. He also organized the national intelligence agency, ANSESAL. These institutions helped consolidate an era of military hegemony in El Salvador, sowing terror selectively among alleged subversives identified by the intelligence services. In this way, the army's domination over civilian society was consolidated through repression in order to keep society under control. During those years of military dictatorship, the Government kept itself in power basically by using "selective violence".

The reformist coup by young military officers in 1979 ushered in a new period of intense violence. Various circles in the armed forces and the private sector vied for control of the repressive apparatus. Hundreds and even thousands of people perceived as supporters or active members of a growing guerrilla movement - the Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional (FMLN) - were murdered. Members of the army, the Treasury Police, the National Guard and the National Police formed "squads" to do away with enemies. Private and semi-official groups also set up their own squads or linked up with existing structures within the armed forces.

The Commission on the Truth received testimony describing this phenomenon of local violence, such as that which occurred in the village of Cojutepeque and in the towns of San Rafael de los Cedros, El Rosario and Monte San Juan in the south-eastern part of the Department of Cuscatlán. In this area, civil defence forces, soldiers from the local military detachment, members of the National Guard and civilian members of ORDEN took part in death squads that killed hundreds of people. In the Second Court of Cojutepeque, the judge showed the court register for 1980, which listed 141 cases of homicide. He said that 2,000 people had been murdered in the Department of Cuscatlán that year and that probably less than 20 per cent of those murders had been registered in court.

It should be said that, while it is possible to differentiate the armed forces death squads from the civilian death squads, the borderline between the two was often blurred. For instance, even the death squads that were not organized as part of any State structure were often supported or tolerated by State institutions. Frequently, death squads operated in coordination with the armed forces and acted as a support structure for their activities. The clandestine nature of these activities made it possible to conceal the State's responsibility for them and created an atmosphere of complete impunity for the murderers who worked in the squads. This mentality and actual exercise of impunity is a danger for Salvadorian society.

Two cases illustrate the composition and operation of the death squads during this stage: the group around Major D'Aubuisson and the death squads that operated out of the S-II or C-II intelligence sections of military institutions. The Commission on the Truth considers it appropriate to describe these two groups because their activities caused anxiety, fear and great harm to civilian society in El Salvador. These, of course, were not the only death squads active in the country.

The 1979 coup d'etat altered the political landscape in El Salvador. ⁴¹⁹ One of the competing factions directly affected by the coup was a core of military officers who sought to pre-empt the groups that had staged the coup and also any reform movement. ⁴²⁰ They considered the Government Junta to be "infiltrated by Marxist officers, which could be fatal for the independence and freedom of the Salvadorian fatherland if the anti communists in the population failed to act". ⁴²¹ The leader of this faction was former Major Roberto D'Aubuisson, who up until 1979 had been third in command of ANSESAL and who, on being retired, kept part of the agency's archives.

Former Major D'Aubuisson drew considerable support from wealthy civilians who feared that their interests would be affected by the reform programme announced by the Government Junta. They were convinced that the country faced a serious threat of Marxist insurrection which they had to overcome. The Commission on the Truth obtained testimony from many sources that some of the richest landowners and businessmen inside and outside the country offered their estates, homes, vehicles and bodyguards to help the death squads. They also provided the funds used to organize and maintain the squads, especially those directed by former Major D'Aubuisson.

As the social conflict in El Salvador intensified, subversive operations increased. D'Aubuisson was well placed to provide a link between a very aggressive sector of Salvadorian society and the intelligence network and operations of the S-II sections of the security forces. He was virtually catapulted to undisputed national political leadership of the only faction capable "of preventing a left-wing takeover". ⁴²² He then opted for applying what he saw as the only method used by the subversives: the illegal use of force. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth", as the saying goes.

D'Aubuisson arranged meetings between powerful civilians and economic interests and groups in the armed forces, thereby combining two elements in a strategic relationship: the input of resources (money, vehicles, weapons, homes, etc.) by civilians and the definition of a political line for the operations of the S-II intelligence sections. This gave political meaning and purpose to the attacks on and intimidation of civilian opponents and individuals suspected of collaborating with or belonging to the guerrilla movement.

For D'Aubuisson, having access to intelligence reports was of the utmost importance, because it served the cause and the functioning of his political plans. He lost no opportunity to infiltrate the security forces and the armed forces and elicit information from them. In line with D'Aubuisson's political project, all such information was used for "direct action", which explicitly included assassination attempts on individuals, abductions, "recovery of funds" and sabotage. ⁴²³

After the assassination of Monsignor Romero, which, in very closed circles, D'Aubuisson took credit for having planned (see the case of the assassination of Archbishop Romero), his prestige and influence grew among the groups that wielded economic power, gaining him further support and resources. The San Luis estate incident and his temporary stay in Guatemala did not interrupt his political plans, since it was in Guatemala that he was able to establish contacts with internationally linked anti-communist networks and organizations and individual anti-communists such as Mario Sandoval Alarcón, Luis Mondizabal and Ricardo Lao.

From Guatemala, D'Aubuisson continued to plan and direct numerous attacks by groups identified as "death squads" and, on his return to El Salvador, had access to sources which kept him permanently supplied with abundant, up-to-date intelligence information from most armed units or territorial districts, whose leaders shared his political views. They also offered him actual logistical support for his activities, seconding and rotating troops for his personal protection and supplying weapons.

Although members of the Armed Forces Joint Staff knew about this steady leak of information, not only was nothing ever done to control it but intelligence leaks were even organized intentionally: in fact, there were serving members of the armed forces who participated actively in D'Aubuisson's group.

There is substantial evidence that D'Aubuisson operated during this period through concealed channels in which civilians and both serving and discharged members of the armed forces mixed politics, murder and the defence of their own economic interests in their zeal to combat both the peaceful and the armed opposition.

One of those closest to D'Aubuisson was his Chief of Security, Héctor Antonio Regalado. The Commission on the Truth obtained sufficient evidence to conclude that Regalado not only formed his own death squad in the town of Santiago de María but also used to coordinate and train D'Aubuisson's networks in the capital. Regalado ran D'Aubuisson's death squad from his office in the National Assembly, where he was Chief of Security when D'Aubuisson was President of the Assembly. ⁴²⁴

In many armed forces units, the intelligence section (S-II) operated on the death squad model. Operations were carried out by members of the armed forces, usually wearing civilian clothing, without insignias, and driving unmarked vehicles.

The Salvadorian armed forces also maintained within the Joint Staff under Department 5 - Civilian Affairs, a secret, clandestine intelligence unit for the surveillance of civilian political targets, which received information from the S-II sections of each military unit or security force. The purpose of this unit was to obtain information for the planning of direct actions that included the "elimination" of individuals. In some cases, such plans were transmitted as actual orders to operational units in the various security forces or the armed forces themselves.

Testimony and information received by the Commission on the Truth from former members of the S-II section of the National Guard show that the murder of Rodolfo Viera, President of the Salvadorian Institute for Agrarian Reform (ISTA), and two United States advisers in January 1981 was not an isolated event. Members of this section, with the complicity of economically influential civilians, operated as a death squad dedicated to eliminating political opponents and people considered to be supporters of the armed left wing.

A group of extreme right-wing civilians that included Hans Christ, Ricardo Sol Meza, Constantino Rampone and Ernest Panamá acted as "advisers" to the S-II section of the National Guard and influenced its work. They often visited headquarters to meet with the Chief of Section II, Major Mario Denis Morán, and his second-in-command, Lieutenant Isidro López Sibrián. On various occasions, they provided money and weapons. There is also evidence and testimony that Argentine nationals frequented S-II headquarters and were commissioned by the above-mentioned group of civilians to carry out assignments that included murders.

Information from a wide variety of sources also indicates that Major Morán, Lieutenant López Sibrián and Captain Eduardo Avila - all three of whom held leadership positions in the S-II were connected with it - were members of death squads with links to the civilians mentioned.

The Intelligence Section had subsections such as operations and intelligence. Within the intelligence subsection, there was a smaller group in charge of "dirty work", which specialized in interrogations, torture and executions. This group enjoyed the full confidence of its superiors and acted as a special corps in the service of Morán and López Sibrián, who were numbers one and two respectively in the S-II. This group comprised, inter alia, Rodolfo Orellana Osorio, Enoc Abel Campos ("Heidi"), René Mauricio Cruz González, Oscar Reinaldo Bonilla Monge and Mario Ernesto Aparicio. The group did not observe the hierarchical chain of command but took orders only from Morán and López Sibrián, and its members came and went at will.

Because of the clandestine nature of their operations, it is not easy to establish all the links existing between private businessmen and the death squads. However, the Commission on the Truth has absolutely no doubt that a close relationship existed, or that the possibility that businessmen or members of moneyed families might feel the need and might be able to act with impunity in financing murderous paramilitary groups, as they did in the past, poses a threat to the future of Salvadorian society.

At the same time, it must be pointed out that the United States Government tolerated, and apparently paid little official heed to the activities of Salvadorian exiles living in Miami, especially between 1979 and 1983. According to testimony received by the Commission, this group of exiles directly financed and indirectly helped run certain death squads. It would be useful if other investigators with more resources and more time were to shed light on this tragic story so as to ensure that persons linked to terrorist acts in other countries are never tolerated again in the United States.

1. The State of El Salvador, through the activities of members of the armed forces and/or civilian officials, is responsible for having taken part in, encouraged and tolerated the operations of the death squads which illegally attacked members of the civilian population.

2. Salvadorian institutions must make serious efforts to investigate the structural connection that has been found to exist between the death squads and State bodies. The fact that there are hundreds of former civil defence members in rural areas who are still armed is particular cause for concern. These people could easily mobilize to commit new acts of violence in future if they are not clearly identified and disarmed.

3. It is especially important to call attention to the repeated abuses committed by the intelligence services of the security forces and the armed forces. It is crucial for the future of El Salvador that the State pay attention to the use of intelligence services and to the exploitation of this arm of the Government to identify targets for murder or disappearance. Any investigation must result both in an institutional clean-up of the intelligence services and in the identification of those responsible for this aberrant practice.

4. The lack of effective action by the judicial system was a factor that reinforced the impunity that shielded and continues to shield members and promoters of the death squads in El Salvador.

5. The links of some private businessmen and moneyed families to the funding and use of death squads must be clarified.

6. The Government must recognize that, given their organizational structure and the fact that they possess weapons, there is a serious danger that the death squads may become involved, as has happened in some cases, in illegal activities such as drug trafficking, arms trafficking and abductions for ransom.

7. The issue of the death squads in El Salvador is so important that it requires special investigation. More resolute action by national institutions, with the cooperation and assistance of foreign authorities who have any information on the subject, is especially needed. In order to verify a number of specific violations and ascertain who was responsible, it will be necessary to investigate the serious acts of violence committed by death squads on a case-by-case basis.

Posted by USIP Library on: January 26, 2001
Source: UN Security Council, Annex, From Madness to Hope: the 12-year war in El Salvador: Report of the Commission on the Truth for El Salvador, S/25500, 1993, 127-138.