Colombian amry kills indigenous leaders husband
gizzacroggy | 22.12.2008 00:18
I arrived in Cali after a 15hour journey to find J* waiting for my arrival, anxious to share with me, an international, the events of last week in Cauca, Colombia. My tiredness and hunger disappeared as I pulled out my notebook and began to scribble down his words.
At 4am on Edwin Legarda was driving down a quiet rural road in indigenous territory in western Colombia when the Colombian army shot at the vehicle. He later died in hospital. He was driving the car that normally carries his wife as she goes about her political activities in the region. His wife is Aida Quilcue, an impressive indigenous leader whose words I heard during the Minga in Bogota.
She believes that the bullets were meant for her because of her work in organising and mobilising thousands of indigenous as part of the Minga, a historical process which saw 40000 indigenous across the country unite with farmers, students, workers to defend the right to life and territory.
At first it appears staggering that the army had the audacity to attempt to kill Aida just one day after her return from meetings with the United Nations in Switzerland. However Colombians live under a regimen that violently attacks social movements and then presents these murders to the public as either an accident or justified because of supposed links to guerilla groups.
For example, President Uribe defended this killing in the press, saying that soldiers fired at the vehicle after the driver twice failed to heed an order to stop at a rural roadblock. Yet the evidence, preserved and documented by the indigenous guard contradicts this version of events.
They counted one hundred and five bullet cases. Of the bullets shot, sixteen ended up in the vehicle, but crucially, only three in the back. Why did 13 bullets end in the front and sides of the vehicle if it was shot at for not stopping at the roadblock?
The first version of events told by the head of the military unit was that they had been shot at and so had shot back. The indigenous guard seized the soldiers weapons. There were 35 soldiers and 38 guns. Sergeant Ramirez was unable to justify why three more guns than people. Was the plan to plant these guns in the vehicle as ‘proof’ of their terrorist connections?
The story later changed. “Edwin died because he failed to stop in a military roadblock” according to the Comandante of the III Division of the Colombian Army. Yet the Indigenous guard noted the absence of any signs making people aware of this mentioned military roadblock.
The indigenous guard also documented the existence of imprints of bodies on the side of the road, evidence of soldiers lying there for some time. Soldiers don’t normally lie down at roadblocks. Were they waiting for the vehicle in which Aida Quilcué normally travels?
Indigenous authorities are demanding that the case be assumed by the indigenous justice system as they are the legitimate authority in the area, and in order to avoid the case falling into the circle of impunity surrounding thousands of civilian deaths at the hands of the Colombian military.
Translation of statement by Colombia´s national indigenous organisation (ONIC)
http://www.colombiasolidarity.org.uk/content/view/441/
A day that will live in infamy once again by Mario Murillo
http://mamaradio.blogspot.com/2008/12/day-that-will-live-in-infamy-once-again.html
She believes that the bullets were meant for her because of her work in organising and mobilising thousands of indigenous as part of the Minga, a historical process which saw 40000 indigenous across the country unite with farmers, students, workers to defend the right to life and territory.
At first it appears staggering that the army had the audacity to attempt to kill Aida just one day after her return from meetings with the United Nations in Switzerland. However Colombians live under a regimen that violently attacks social movements and then presents these murders to the public as either an accident or justified because of supposed links to guerilla groups.
For example, President Uribe defended this killing in the press, saying that soldiers fired at the vehicle after the driver twice failed to heed an order to stop at a rural roadblock. Yet the evidence, preserved and documented by the indigenous guard contradicts this version of events.
They counted one hundred and five bullet cases. Of the bullets shot, sixteen ended up in the vehicle, but crucially, only three in the back. Why did 13 bullets end in the front and sides of the vehicle if it was shot at for not stopping at the roadblock?
The first version of events told by the head of the military unit was that they had been shot at and so had shot back. The indigenous guard seized the soldiers weapons. There were 35 soldiers and 38 guns. Sergeant Ramirez was unable to justify why three more guns than people. Was the plan to plant these guns in the vehicle as ‘proof’ of their terrorist connections?
The story later changed. “Edwin died because he failed to stop in a military roadblock” according to the Comandante of the III Division of the Colombian Army. Yet the Indigenous guard noted the absence of any signs making people aware of this mentioned military roadblock.
The indigenous guard also documented the existence of imprints of bodies on the side of the road, evidence of soldiers lying there for some time. Soldiers don’t normally lie down at roadblocks. Were they waiting for the vehicle in which Aida Quilcué normally travels?
Indigenous authorities are demanding that the case be assumed by the indigenous justice system as they are the legitimate authority in the area, and in order to avoid the case falling into the circle of impunity surrounding thousands of civilian deaths at the hands of the Colombian military.
Translation of statement by Colombia´s national indigenous organisation (ONIC)
http://www.colombiasolidarity.org.uk/content/view/441/ A day that will live in infamy once again by Mario Murillo
http://mamaradio.blogspot.com/2008/12/day-that-will-live-in-infamy-once-again.html
gizzacroggy
Homepage:
http://gizzacroggy.blogspot.com
Comments
Hide the following comment
Uribe’s Democratic Security Policy kills Edwin Legarda
24.12.2008 15:03
Author: Indigenous Regional Council of Cauca (CRIC – abbreviation in Spanish)
Institutional commitment to refute the version that the deceased, Edwin Legarda had ignored a military roadblock.
The Indigenous Regional Council of Cauca, CRIC, with respect to the attack in which José Edwin Legarda died husband of the Chief Council of CRIC, Aida Quilcue, makes the following clarifications:
The death of the husband of the Chief Council of CRIC cannot be intepreted as an isolated event. Rather, it is part of a chain of murders, persecution, illegal judicial proceedings and displacment that the indigenous communties are sustaining and in which the State participates by acion, ommision and permission.
These repeated human rights violation against the indigenous communties is a consequence of President Álvaro Uribe Vélez’s democratic security policy.
The evidence gathering at the scene of the attack makes it clear that the presidential version of events, that there was an error in the signing of the military blockade or that Edwin Legarda drove past the military roadblock, is false. Firsly, there are traces which indicate that the soldiers were in trenches for several hours stretched out over 800m, waiting for the car. Secondly around the time of the attack, various vehicles were on route to a meeting of the Togoima committe that was going to take place the same day and at which the Chief Council of CRIC Aida Quilcue Viva was planning on attending, and yet the military group present did not summon any vehicle to stop. Thirdly in the document signed by the General Leonardo Barrero of the Vigésima Novena Brigade of the Army and the Indigenous authorities, the General commmited himself to refute the version that "the deceased, Edwin Legarda had ignored a military roadblock."
This attack was aimed at the Chief Council of CRIC, particularly Aida Quilcue Vivas, who should have passed by the site at the time of the attack on route to the la Mesa de Togoima, Páez muncipy, if she had not been delayed.
The military unit were not able to explain two guns that were present without a soldier assigned to them. The indigenous authories take this as an indication that they planned to plant false evidence after the attack.
In the first version of events, the Commanding officer of the patrolling military in the presence of the indigenous authories said that there had been gun fire in the CRIC vehicle. This version was later changed, and he said that Mr Legarda had drove past a military roadblock, and finally admitted that it was related to a military error.
Community land owner, Edwin Legarda managed to escape from the attack despite his fatal injuries and thus avoided being set-up with the two guns that were in the possession of the military without explanation; a situation that would have put in doubt the civility of our resistance and the transparency of our organisation.
President Álvaro Uribe’s speeches, justiying the military action where the husband of the Chief Council of Cric died is nothing more than another hoax in order to blur this State crime and justify the continuation of the policy of exterminating the indigenous communities.
In spite of the multiple threats and attacks agianst the indigenous authorities and CRIC members, the Colombian state has not take any measures to protect the pyhsical and moral integrity of our leaders, quite the opposite. It appears that the government is using its political influence to avoid that the Interamerican Commision for Human Rights enacts the precautionary measures requested by different human rights organisation in defence of our organisational processes.
Finally we appeal to the international community, especially human rights organisations, to pay attention to the development of national policies in opposition to indigenous communities; given that our protests are stigmatised and criminalised which puts our processes, traditional authorities, organisational personal, indigenous leaders and communities at high risk
Consequently, we express that what happens to our people and our organisational processes is the responsibility of Colombian state
Popayán, 19th December 2008.
Indigenous Regional Council of Cauca - CRIC
Tejido de Comunicación y Relaciones Externas para la Verdad y la Vida
Asociación de Cabildos Indígenas del Norte del Cauca - ACIN
Telefax: 0928 - 290958 - 293999
Email:
Web: www.nasaacin.org/index.htm
Santander de Quilichao Cauca -Colombia
report by Cauca Indigenous council