Peruvians demand extradition of ex-president Fujimori
By Cesar Uco
26 November 2005
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

Thousands of angry workers, students and human rights advocates marched in Lima last week demanding the extradition of former president Alberto Fujimori from Chile. If returned to Perú, Fujimori would face trial on 22 criminal charges of corruption and human rights abuses. The charges carry sentences of up to 30 years in jail and $29 million in fines.

Fujimori arrived in Santiago, Chile on November 7 and was arrested soon after as the Chilean courts yielded to the Peruvian government’s demands for his detention.

After a decade in power, Fujimori deserted the Peruvian presidency in October 2000 amid accusations of corruption and abuse of power. He fled to Japan, where he was granted citizenship and lived under the protection of right-wing politicians.

In March 2003, Interpol issued an international warrant for his arrest on charges of murder and kidnapping in Perú. Included in the charges were the ex-president’s leading role in the activities of the death squad known as Grupo Colina, responsible for the massacres of La Cantuta and Barrios Altos at the beginning of his presidency in 1991-92.

Relatives of death squad victims have traveled to Chile to pressure the Chilean government to extradite Fujimori to Perú. “We want the victims’ voice to be heard,” said Alejandro Silva, a representative of the Lima-based National Coordinator of Human Rights, which organized the trip.

Some, however, think Japan pressured him to

FOR THE REST GO TO:
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/fuji-n26.shtml

WWW.WSWS.ORG

Once listening Radio France International I heard something that may please those against democracy. The political and economic structures of democracy in general around Latin America, said the RFI program, were in bad shape, and that was leading our countries to authoritian leaders.The idea was "caudillos" will come back in a battered South America to impose discipline

The lack of organization and corruption at almost every level, is pushing our countries to reject democracy and ask for "strong hand" leaders.

That's what we are witnessing today the only problem is these leaders are doing it even worse.

The people who voted for Chavez and all the others leftist presidents in South America may regret their vote,things have not improved.

A mature population must know how to vote. The phrase may say Business YES!, Authoritian governments, NO!

Sincerely

Julio dadetraffic@bellsouth.net

Phone 305-226-0909

8356 SW 40th Street, Suite L, Miami,FL 33155

Julio,
In the statement at the end of your posting, you show the "lack of maturity" and "ingenuidad" that you criticize in Latin American voters.
Throughtout the history of Latin America "business" has not a better record than the "caudillos." Either through extractive industries or protected by ISI-type policies, local business elites and foreign companies have benefited from authoritarianism and democratic governments alike through corruption. Hence, the wealth created has not trickled down to the majority of the population. A public-private partnership is key key to guarantee greater opportunities for people to improve their living standards. However, the government has to represent the interest of the country. You think that the Latin American presidents of the nineties (Menem, Salinas, Fujimori, Perez, Sanchez de Lozada) had that in their minds?

I do not know anything about Humala, but his economic analysis is correct. While the companies that went to China orginally operated out of Western, developed countries, they have now found a new home in China with it's cheap labor. China is now dumping their goods on the Western Hemisphere including the United States. We are seeing the underdevelopement of the entire Western Hemisphere and, for that matter the the world as a goal for the multinational corporations. The so-called anti-immmigration legislation being proposed in the House of Representatives is a push back against the Bush Administrations support of the outsourcing of jobs and industries to other countries for cheap labor, and the in sourcing of temporary legal and illegal immigrants to further drive down the wages and standard of living of the American people. Conservatives are now attacking Social Security and other social programs that benefit middle cclass. The student riots in France are another aspect of the same problem.
While they may not the yet know the labels, it is a revolt against "Free Trade" Economic Imperialism of the Neoliberals and Neoconservatives. Economically there is no difference.
As Alexander Hamilton taught us, there is no, I repeat no, development without trade barriers to protects jobs and local industries from being washed away in the tide of chaep goods from more developed industrial countries.

Hey che, you got the wrong forum dude, this is about peruvian politics

A wild card is Humala's child-wife Nadine, who strides a line in her Nikes somewhere between Chuck Berry and Evita. Will Humala nationalize her feet?

THE IRAN PLANS
Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb?

The Bush Administration, while publicl advocating diplomacy in order to stop Iran fro pursuing a nuclear weapon, has increase clandestine activities inside Iran and intensifie planning for a possible major air attack. Curren and former American military and intelligenc officials said that Air Force planning groups ar drawing up lists of targets, and teams o American combat troops have been ordered int Iran, under cover, to collect targeting data and t establish contact with anti-government ethnic-minority groups. The officials say that Presiden Bush is determined to deny the Iranian regim the opportunity to begin a pilot program planned for this spring, to enrich urani

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

I would not normally support a man like Humala, but the strong stand he has taken against George W. Bush makes him more appealing to me. I plan to vote for him in our upcoming presidential elections. George W. Bush is a menace to world peace. Anyone who takes a firm stand against him has my vote.

Good for those Venezuelans! It may not be the most sophisticated form of protest, but throwing eggs at the U.S. ambassador communicates our feelings well. Pelting eggs at U.S. envoys is the least we can do to show our disgust with Bush and the nation stupid enough to have elected him.

"Supporters of left-wing President Hugo Chavez pelted the U.S. ambassador's car with eggs and vegetables and chased his convoy on a motorbike after he was forced to leave a charity event, U.S. officials said. Local municipal officials denied they had sanctioned the protest."

Ernesto -

Let me see if I understand you correctly...you would vote for anyone who stands up to George W? So I suppose that it wouldn't matter if that leader impoverishes his people, closes down newspapers, jails or kills dissenters, or even encourages drug use or pedophilia? As a fellow latino your attitude is embarassing and proof positive that we as a people probably aren't mature enough to handle democracy. No wonder Peru is so messed up.

Hola Cardinal, No, I wouldn't vote for an anti-Bush candidate under every circumstance. But I would under most circumstances. Pro-U.S. candidates have, after all, generally been the most corrupt, and the least respectful of human and democratic rights, throughout Latin American history. We need to carve out a strong independent national and foreign policy, and stop cowering before Uncle Sam. Bush is a bigger menace to humanity than any other national leader I can think of, and the U.S. has usually treated us with contempt -- especially these days with Bush in office. So it's time here for a new approach. I'm only advocating that Peru take the same route that most of the rest of Latin America has already taken: elect a strong left-leaning president who will stand up to Washington, not bow and scrape before it. The current president does that, and it has gotten us Peruvians nowhere.
We need to join with the Venezuelans, Brazilians, Argentines, Cubans, Uruguayans, Chileans and Bolivians in saying NO to George W. Bush, NO to Washington and NO to the U.S.A.

Populism is farce. It keeps the people poor and stupid just waiting for the government to give them everything. Trade protectionism is just corporate welfare in disguise.

"Stand up to Washington"? Give me a break, Ernesto. What good have Chavez's demagogic rants done Venezuela? A pack of his thugs pelted the U.S. Ambassador's car because the Ambassador had the temerity to give out free baseballs. That isn't "standing up to Washington", that is juvenile idiocy.

Hey Fransico, yeah, throw some eggs at the Ambassador's car! Go back to high school!

You know what? Chavez has delivered for Venezuela in whole orders of magnitude more than all of the corrupt U.S.-backed elitists who preceded him put together. It's just that it's hard to notice this if you live in a gated community at the top of a hill and rely on servants to do everything for you, as so many of the anti-Chavistas do.
Keep ingratiating yourself to Uncle Sam, Jomama. It hasn't paid off for us Latin Americans yet but, hey, maybe one day it will.
Meantime, I'm sticking with Chavez and the other democratically elected heads of state representing the vast majority of Latin Americans who today are saying NO to Bush, NO to Washington and NO to that ugly global bully, the U.S.A.

Hi! Very interesting! pcvvkqvz