Murderer of the UCA martyrs is convicted
A decisive step has just been taken along the path towards justice for those murdered in 1989 at the UCA Jesuit university (Republic of San Salvador) during that black moonlit dawn: the Jesuits Segundo Montes, Ignacio Ellacuría, Amando López, Ignacio Martín-Baró, Juan Ramón Moreno and Joaquín López, the cook at the Jesuit residence Julia Elba Ramos, and her 15-year-old daughter Celina Mariceth Ramola. I wanted to put all these martyrs on record one by one, each by his/her name and surname.
The Spanish National Criminal Court (Audiencia Nacional) sentenced Inocente Orlando-Montano, ex-colonel and ex-Deputy Minister for Security of the Republic of El Salvador, to 133 years in prison, just over 26 years for each of the five murdered Spanish Jesuits, because the Spanish court can only rule in his case.
I welcome this.
The court solemnly recognised the truth of the facts which were only hidden from those who did not want to see: the eight murders “were plotted, planned, agreed and ordered by members of the high command of the Armed Forces, the body to which Inocente Orlando-Montano belonged in his capacity as Deputy Minister for Public Security”. It was also confirmed that the then president of the Republic of El Salvador Alfredo Cristiani participated in the massacre. The highest level of the national government was confirmed as having committed the most serious crimes of violence “for the purposes of perpetuating their privileged positions”; they lied and used all their power to make people believe that the victims “were acting as agents in a socialist-communist conspiracy”, and that with their liberation theology they were encouraging the peasants to engage “in an international communist conspiracy at the service of the Kremlin”. The facts were described for what they were: “State terrorism”.
The harsh, clear judicial conviction will not suffice to bring the victims back to life, but it is a condition that is necessary to dignify their memory, legitimate their cause and rehabilitate all those who, before and afterwards, laid down their lives for the same cause all over that tormented country. It is a way of resurrecting them. So the judicial condemnation of those who committed such atrocities is therefore fair and necessary. There can be no justice without truth.
But I wonder: Will it be fair and necessary for the perpetrators of such murders to spend years and years behind bars? What is the point in Inocente Orlando-Montano undergoing the torment of 3 years behind bars, let alone 133 years? Would the suffering inflicted on him make amends for the unjust, cruel harm he inflicted on his victims, their families and his country?
If prison, this model of prison, were the only way of stopping a thief robbing again, a murderer from murdering or a rapist from raping, it could be justified. If it could serve to prevent others committing such crimes or to turn the criminals themselves into better people and citizens, it could be understood. But this is clearly not the case. A prison sentence, no matter how long it may be, neither reduces the crime rate nor rehabilitates, re-educates or resocializes criminals. And if a developed society fails to seek better ways of preventing criminals from reoffending, it would be tantamount to recognising that the society in question has renounced its human development. There can be no justice without redress, but prison neither reforms the criminal nor does it make amends for the victim.
I therefore believe that prison is no longer necessary and is therefore unjust. It strikes me as unethical that someone, however criminal they may be, should end up losing their dignity to no purpose in these dens of inhumanity devoid of light or mercy. And that goes for a criminal of the likes of Inocente Orlando-Montano, a member of ETA, a rapist or a fraud, even if he is a king. It sounds tough, but that is what I think.
And I hope that no one will understand that I am defending a failure to act or the defencelessness of a society faced with those out to destroy it, starting in fact with those that destroy it from a position of economic or political power. On the contrary, I am defending the position that a human, developed, sensitive and wise society should seek an alternative to prisons; another intelligent, humanizing effective means to prevent crime, to regenerate the criminal and, first and foremost, to heal the wounds of all the victims. And I maintain that these alternative means are within our grasp. It is a question of will.
While we remain trapped in the logic of crime and revenge, crime and punishment, we will not transform this unending story of ours of perpetrators and victims. While we remain incapable of overcoming the expiatory criminal mentality underpinning our penitentiary system, despite what the Spanish Constitution proclaims, and unable to build a fair, peaceful society without prisons, we will have failed to “turn history around, subvert it and launch it in another direction”, as Ignacio Ellacuría wrote.
Alba and Celina, Segundo, Ignacio, Amando, Ignacio, Juan Ramón and Joaquín: pray for us. What I mean is this: may your memory live on in our lives, your breath in ours, and may we follow in your footsteps, until the daybreak finally comes, until all convictions are exchanged for justice. (Aizarna, Basque Country. 14 September, 2020)