323. In response to those questions, the representative of the State party
said that the Constitution recognized the legal existence and capacity of the
peasant and indigenous communities, who were autonomous in their
administrative organization, community work and use of land, and that their
land ownership, traditions and practices were respected by the Government.
However, owing to the serious impact of terrorism and drug trafficking in
those communities, government policies that aimed at ensuring minority
participation had fallen short of expectations and additional activities were
being undertaken. One of the objectives of the government strategy to combat
drug trafficking was to enable indigenous communities in coca-growing regions
to enter into negotiations with businesses interested in investing in other
crops. Peasant communities could also organize politically.
324. In compliance with the decision adopted by the Committee at its 1148th
meeting, the State party submitted a supplementary report dealing with events
occurring subsequent to the consideration of the second periodic report at the
Committee's forty-fourth session, in particular in respect of the application
of articles 4, 6, 7, 9, 19 and 25 of the Covenant.
325. Referring to the events that had taken place on 5 April 1992 and the
ensuing state of emergency, members wished to know which of the rights
protected under the Covenant were being suspended; how the independence of the
judiciary was being ensured when all new judges were appointed by the
President; what had been the benefit, if any, of the dissolution of Congress
and the removal of judges; what measures were being taken to control the
military and security forces; whether allegations of the crimes of violence,
enforced disappearance and summary execution were investigated and the
perpetrators punished; and whether habeas corpus was still in effect. Members
also questioned the constitutionality of the steps taken by the President of
Peru on 5 April 1992, which some saw as a coup d'etat, and wished to know
whether the Constitution was still in force; what the constitutional basis was
for the reconstruction measures being taken; whether the relevant details
regarding the state of emergency had been communicated to the SecretaryGeneral; and what measures had been taken to alleviate hardships and to ensure
implementation of the Covenant during the state of emergency.
326. In addition, members wished to know the basis for the conclusion, by the
Government of Emergency and National Reconstruction, that a very high
percentage of Peruvians had supported the measures taken on 5 April 1992.
Further information was also sought on the disaster that had taken place in
the Castro Castro Prison; the activities of paramilitary groups, rondas
campesinas and peasant patrols; the house arrest of politicians after
5 April 1992; the register of detainees; violations of human rights by members
of the military forces and whether any training had been provided to them on
human rights; the jurisdiction and duties of the courts dealing with offences
committed by juveniles; the position of former President Alan Garcia and
whether he would be allowed to return to Peru and to participate in the
elections; restrictions on a citizen's right to participate in the political
life of the State; the number of political prisoners; details of Decree-Law
No. 25592 and the criteria for the selection of personnel for the newly formed
Human Rights Council in Peru. Members also reiterated concerns that had been
voiced earlier relating to such matters as the right to life, the role of the
military courts, the need to combat terrorism other than by State terrorism,
and, more generally, the overall impact of the state of emergency on the
implementation of the provisions of the Covenant.
-77-