The Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP) rejects and mourns the murder of Abelardo Lis, a reporter from Nación Nasa indigenous radio station in the municipality of Corinto, who was covering a demonstration of indigenous peoples in the north of Cauca department. FLIP requests the authorities to investigate those responsible for these criminals acts to issue the appropriate punishments.  

On August 13, the indigenous communicator received bullet shots in the chest and abdomen while covering the process of ‘liberation of mother earth’ advanced by the indigenous peoples in El Barranco village of the municipality of Corinto, in the north of Cauca department. The attack occurred amid the operation carried out by the National Army to evict the indigenous communities of Granadita and Gracia Arriba estates. Two more people in the community were injured. 

Reporters who are part of the Fabric of Communications for Truth and Life of the Association of Indigenous Peoples of North Cauca (ACIN in Spanish), who were also covering the public demonstration, told FLIP that the shots came from the sector in which the members of the National Army were located. In addition, the communicators reported that members of the institution impeded the passage of the van where members of the same indigenous community attempted to transport the three injured persons. FLIP was informed that the communicator died while being transferred to Corinto hospital.

The Association of Indigenous Peoples of North Cauca has denounced in a statement that they have been the victims of attacks on their lives and integrity by riot police (ESMAD in Spanish), mounted police and army officers since the 12th of August.

The Foundation for Press Freedom rejects the press release of the National Army, issued on the 13th of August, in which the impacts on civil society in the middle of the operation are disregarded, and the causes of the death of Abelardo Lis are not clarified. In this regard, FLIP expresses its concern at the military's remarks against indigenous communities, against whom it makes responsible for the alleged attacks on the law enforcement personnel to justify its disproportionate military actions, which in this case compromised the lives of three people, Including that of Abelardo Lis. 

FLIP demands the National Army to investigate these events promptly to clarify the circumstances of the death of the indigenous communicator, and to determine the responsibility of the officers in charge of the operation in these events. The Foundation asks the institution to give precise instructions on the fulfillment of its duty as guarantors of press freedom in this type of scenarios, where the presence of press teams is a guarantee of transparency around military operations.

The Foundation for Press Freedom calls on the Attorney General's Office of the Nation to start a disciplinary investigation into the procedures advanced by members of the law enforcement personnel in these operations, and to follow up on the investigations that are carried out inside the National Army. FLIP also requests the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate community complaints in order to advance relevant actions to ensure respect for human rights of those involved in the protest actions and those who make information coverage of these events. 

Finally, FLIP deeply regrets these events and sends a message of solidarity to the family of Abelardo Lis and to the entire indigenous community of Cauca department. 

Last Tuesday, August 4, the First Municipal Criminal Court of Tumaco granted the release of Gustavo Angulo Arboleda, alias Cherry, on the expiration of terms. Angulo Arboleda was under preventive detention on the trial that is advanced for the crimes of aggravated extortion kidnapping and conspiracy to commit a crime, in the case of the kidnapping and murder of Javier Ortega, Paúl Rivas and Efraín Segarra, a press team of El Comercio newspaper. The crimes occurred in March and April 2018 on the border between Colombia and Ecuador. 

Javier, Paúl and Efraín were engaged in journalistic work on the complex situation of law and order in the border area, characterized by the absence of institutions from both States. Two years later, the border continues to be a silenced area for journalism and the clarification of the crime against El Comercio’s press team seems far away. 

In the case of Angulo Arboleda, the administration of justice has been slow, with excessive delays in scheduling hearings. This shows that, despite the seriousness of the criminal acts, overcoming the state of impunity is not one of the priorities of the Colombian State. (You can review a timeline with the dates of the judiciary proceeding against Angulo Arboleda at the end of this press release.)

It is relevant to remember that Gustavo Alonso Ospina Hernández, alias Barbas , was also released, in June of this year; the one who has not appeared himself to the court hearings that continue to advance against him. 

In 2018, the State announced to the families and to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) that every effort would be made to bring those responsible to justice, and that commitment would seem to have been dropped over time. 

For Ricardo Rivas, brother of Paúl Rivas, access to justice has been outrageous and out wearing: “It is no less than outrageous to know and be aware that justice is not being delivered and does not exist in this case in Colombia. At the meetings we had with the IACHR in Washington, the State's commitment was that: To follow up, to speed up on this case that has been emblematic at the regional level. Unfortunately, we have not seen the results.” 

For Fundamedios, FLIP and the victims' families, these decisions are a clear sign of the risk of impunity that this case is taking. We therefore call on the States of Colombia and Ecuador to reaffirm their commitment to the fight against impunity in this case and, to adopt the recommendations suggested by the IACHR Special Monitoring Team. 

In this regard, the Colombian State, must adopt guidelines to prioritize the prosecution of justice in this case through the Prosecutor's Office of the Nation and the Superior Council of the Judiciary, in accordance with international standards for the investigation, trial and punishment of serious human rights violations.

“As victims, it also affects us. It makes us think that unfortunately it is a hard path on which we must continue to work and fight until we can achieve the objective of reaching said justice, truth and equity in this case”, Ricardo Rivas.

In 2020, the National Army has been reiterating in attacks and assaults against the press: Yesterday, Abelardo Liz, an indigenous communicator of Cauca, was murdered by bullets fired from where soldiers of the National Army were located. Days ago, in another area of the country, a reporter lost three fingers after a physical assault. Illegal Arrests and Espionage and Surveillance Actions Have Been Widely Denounced, and Threats Against Journalists Continue. 

Despite constant allegations, to date, FLIP is not aware of disciplinary sanctions or convictions for any of these events. 

 

Journalism is Mourning

Yesterday, August 13, FLIP denounced the murder of Abelardo Liz, a journalist of Nación Nasa radio station, who died while being transferred to Cali for medical care. The reporter received several firearm impacts while covering the ‘liberation of mother earth’ process carried out by the indigenous peoples in El Barranco village of the municipality of Corinto, in the north of Cauca. Reporters who are part of the Fabric of Communications for Truth and Life of the Association of Indigenous Peoples of North Cauca (ACIN in Spanish), who were also covering the public demonstration, claim that the shots came from the sector in which the members of the National Army were located.

This Murder is the Most Serious Violation of Press Freedom that FLIP has Recorded in 2020. However, the Foundation has documented other worrying cases during this year in which members of the National Army would also be involved. 

Physical Assault in Guaviare

In similar circumstances in which Liz was murdered, communicators of Voces del Guayabero collective, who work in the south of Meta department and the north of Guaviare, have received different attacks during the development of their reporting that have put their life and integrity at risk. The first of these occurred on June 4, when Fernando Osorio lost three fingers of his right hand after being shot by the National Army. 

In addition to this disproportionate attack, Osorio and three of his colleagues from Voces del Guayabero have denounced threats to their lives and irregular arrests by military personnel, who constantly accuse communicators as guerrilla members. Press Freedom Violations Against Reporters of this Media Have Occurred during the Coverage of Forced Eradication Operations in Vista Hermosa, Meta department, where, according to journalists, about 80 farmer communities are at risk from military actions by the Law Enforcement Personnel. 

Surveillance and Profiling

Nonetheless, attacks against the press involving members of the National Army are not limited to direct attacks during the coverage of military operations. This alert was issued after Semana Magazine published its investigation named as Secret Folders, in which it denounces the surveillance and profiling actions by the Colombian Army over more than 130 people, including human rights defenders, domestic and international journalists, politicians, union leaders, and other members of the armed forces. On June 11, following a report by the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation, FLIP confirmed that the number of journalists surveilled by the National Army was 52. 

No One is Responsible

Despite requests for investigation by FLIP, to date the National Army has not clarified the events denounced, nor reported on sanctions or convictions against officials responsible for these serious press freedom violations. On the contrary, through its press releases, such as the one published yesterday, August the 13th, the institution continues to deny that civil society is being affected by its actions; and labels out journalists and community members of being insurgents or guerrillas to justify their disproportionate actions. 

These situations are particularly serious, given that the Colombian State has failed to fulfill its responsibility for punishment and prevention as ordered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in 2013 after the attacks on journalist Gonzalo “Richard” Vélez. 

On the 5th of October of that year, the international body sentenced the State for the attacks and subsequent threats by Army members to the reporter in 1996 and forced him into exile. Vélez was recording human rights violations during the coca field marches in Caquetá department. In the judgment, the international body determined that, as a guarantee of non-repetition, the Colombian State should “include a specific module on the protection of the right to freedom of thought and expression of the work that journalists and social communicators carry out in its programs of human rights education directed at the Armed Forces”.  

The systematicity with which the Army has acted to the detriment of the press is a serious indication that these are not isolated actions by individual military personnel, but that there is an instruction within the military forces to limit journalistic activities. For this reason, FLIP reiterates the need for the National Army to promptly investigate the events denounced in order to clarify the responsibility of the military. 

The Foundation also requests that, in response to the judgment of the Inter-American Court, precise instructions are given on the fulfillment of their duty as guarantors of press freedom in this type of scenarios where the presence of press teams is a guarantee of transparency around military operations.

FLIP extends its call to the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation to follow up on the investigations that are carried out inside the National Army. It also requests the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate the complaints of journalists to advance the relevant actions to ensure respect for freedom of the press. 

 

Fabio Restrepo, María Helena Salinas and John Jairo Restrepo were killed in 2000. All three were journalists. This year, their cases have time-barred, will cease to be investigated and the guilty cannot be convicted. In this article we explain more about the lapsing of sentence for homicide offenses to journalists. 

The lapsing of a case is due to the fact that, by constitutional mandate, a time limit must be established for someone to be tried for a crime. This duration is calculated by considering the maximum penalty that the perpetrator could face. For example, in the case of homicides case are time-barred after 20 years, since that is the time at which a person responsible for murder could be sentenced.

In February and March of this year, the time limit to sentence those responsible for the murders of journalists Fabio Restrepo (Santander Department), John Jairo Restrepo (Santander Department) and María Salinas (Antioquia Department) were reached. In the first two cases, the EPL guerrilla is presumed to be responsible, and so is ELN in the case of Salinas. These are the few data on their cases, because the investigation was suspended in the Prosecutor's Office, and there was no further information, even before the date of the lapsing of sentence, as confirmed by Angela Caro, legal advisor of the Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP).

For Caro, there are several errors on the part of the Prosecutor's Office that cause investigations to fail and, over time, many cases are time-barred. One of those mistakes, is that prosecutors are unaware of the journalistic activity that people were exercising before they were killed. The case of Jaime Garzón is an example of this, explains Caro, as the Prosecutor's Office has always claimed that his profession was being a lawyer and his murder was not related to the fact that he was a journalist.

Caro adds that there are no staff who are fully trained to address a crime that may have a relationship with the journalistic activity: “there are officers who don’t know how to define who is a journalist, or don’t understand the risks that are being run in the journalistic trade.”

Another mistake, Caro points out, is that prosecutors limit the investigation to what the victim's family tells them, even though the State has sufficient capacity to advance deeper investigations.  

The last determining point is to guarantee the impartiality of the prosecutor in charge of the investigation. For example, in the case of the murder of journalist Edison Molina, the Puerto Berrío Prosecutor's Office was the first to investigate, although the family alleged a lack of impartiality, as the perpetrators of the crime would have much control in the municipal institutions. Six years later, irregularities that occurred in the first months of the investigation were reported when the case was handled by another branch of the Prosecutor's Office. 

Declaration of a Crime Against Humanity

The declaration of crimes against humanity prevents cases from being time-barred. This declaration may be requested by the victim's family or may be made by the Prosecutor's Office. This can be done before or after the case is time-barred, although the latter is not so common.

However, for a crime to be declared as a crime against humanity, certain characteristics must be proved. The International Criminal Court establishes the following requirements: The first one is that the crime should have been widespread, that is to say that it should have affected a considerable number of civilians; or systematic, which refers to the organized nature of the acts of violence and the unlikelihood of their occurrence by mere coincidence.

A second point is that the conducts must involve the commission of inhumane acts. The third requirement is that the attack should be directed against civilian population. Finally, it must be proved that the crime was motivated by discrimination, whether it was on ideological, political, religious, ethnic, or national reasons.

Caro points out, moreover, that it is not enough for the crime to be declared against humanity if, in the end, investigations do not progress diligently and in a much faster time.

Furthermore, Caro explains that it is important that investigations advance along the lines of the instigators, and not just on those of the perpetrators of crimes against journalists. “It is in this way that it can be determined which was the reason on which the journalist was wanted to be silenced as for press freedom,” says the legal adviser.

We at FLIP express our concern at the lack of results from the Prosecutor's Office in investigating crimes against journalists for reasons of their trade, as our latest annual report named ‘Callar y fingir, la censura de siempre’ (Shut up and pretend, the usual censorship) reveals, there have been 159 murders of journalists between 1977 and 2019, out of which 125 cases are still in total impunity. 

In our commitment to defend the country's press freedom, we will continue to document, denounce, and follow up cases in which the life, integrity or justice of the voices of silenced journalists are at stake.

Time-barred but not Forgotten Cases

The three cases on the murders of reporters Fabio Restrepo, John Jairo Restrepo and María Helena Salinas, which we mentioned at the beginning of this article, were time-barred between February and March of this year. Fabio was a journalist and John Jairo the cameraman of a local television channel in Barrancabermeja; they were murdered while they were doing reporting about urban militias of Barrancabermeja. Maria Helena was a radio journalist for several radio stations in San Carlos, Antioquia and was also a teacher; apparently her murder occurred amid clashes between the Colombian Army and the ELN guerrilla.

On July 16, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that, if approved by the Senate, will compel the Secretary of State in coordination with Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence to submit a report to determine whether the assistance of the United States security sector to the Government of Colombia was used for the purposes of surveillance or illegal intelligence activities on civilian population. It would also aim to identify whether human rights defenders, journalists, judicial personnel, and members of the opposition would be among those affected.  

This alert was issued after Semana Magazine published its “Secret Folders” investigation, in which it denounces the surveillance and profiling actions by the Colombian Army over more than 130 people, including human rights defenders, national and international journalists, politicians, union leaders, and other members of the armed forces. After the public complaint, doubts persist about the possible use of international assistance offered by the United States to carry out these illegal surveillance activities.

This issue has aroused the concern of U.S. Congressmen, and at least 100 of them asked U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to demand Ivan Duque's government to commit itself to the implementation of the Peace Agreement to protect human rights defenders, including journalists. To date, however, there is no public response from the Government to this request.   

So far, the Colombian Government has not disclosed the findings of the disciplinary and criminal proceedings it announced in May 2020, when the complaint was published, nor has it responded to the petition rights submitted by FLIP and journalists victims. In this regard, the Foundation considers it essential and timely for international cooperation to ask Ivan Duque's government to speed up the results of the investigations to protect reporters who are at risk from these surveillance actions. In this regard, it is important for US authorities to take a thorough look at these processes so that the results will make it possible to know the truth about those responsible for the intelligence work and what the scope of these was. 

For FLIP, it is important that this report contains detailed information on the participation of Colombian State agents in the surveillance activities aimed at the press, with details on the activities, the objectives and their scope, in order to identify the chain of command involved in these actions. In addition, as proposed by the United States House of Representatives, the report should account on the use of resources to assist the security sector for these work coming from said country, and the response by the Department of State and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to these complaints. In this regard, the report is expected to answer the following questions to the Colombian State, posed by the reporters affected:

• Who gave the order to profile and surveil journalists and media by military intelligence agencies, which directly attacks free exercise of journalism guarantees in the country?
• One of the objectives of military intelligence is to protect human rights, and to prevent and counter internal or external threats related to national security. Are journalists and media under surveillance by the State a threat to national security? Which criteria justifies the implementation of activities against the press that are originally set up to combat crime?
• Who were the recipients and/or had access to the folders with the profiles and espionage to journalists, politicians, and human rights defenders?
• Does President Ivan Duque, the Ministry of Defense or any of his senior officials have knowledge of these illegal espionage activities? What actions will they take to ensure that journalists can practice their profession without being targeted for profiling, espionage, and stigmatization?

FLIP values positively the commitment of the U.S. authorities to advance oversight actions around these complaints involving the Colombian armed forces. This sends a strong message of rejection of this type of anti-democratic action, and highlights the need for rapid investigations by the Colombian Government and the judicial authorities.

For FLIP, it is essential to clarify the scope of these profiling and surveillance practices on journalists by military intelligence agencies, to assess the risk they pose to journalists. These actions violate Colombian State's obligations in the press freedom area, which are inherent to authoritarian regimes, and call into question the right to an informed society and for guarantees for the free exercise of journalism in the country.  

In this sense, FLIP calls on the Department of State and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to publish their findings, if applicable, to be taken into account in the investigations that the Colombian State is advancing. This input can be vital for expediting disciplinary and criminal investigations, as well as risk assessments by the National Protection Unit, so that the necessary security measures to protect journalists who have been victims of violations of press freedom by the State are taken.

The Foundation also reiterates the call to the Prosecutor's Office of the Nation and the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation to make rapid progress in the investigations in order to clarify the criminal acts, determine the levels of responsibility of the aggressors and to impose the appropriate sanctions.

On July 16, 2020, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that, if approved by the Senate, will compel the Secretary of State in coordination with Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence to submit a report to determine whether the assistance of the United States security sector to the Government of Colombia was used for the purposes of surveillance or illegal intelligence activities on civilian population. It would also aim to identify whether human rights defenders, journalists, judicial personnel, and members of the opposition would be among those affected.  

This alert was issued after Semana Magazine published its “Secret Folders” investigation, in which it denounces the surveillance and profiling actions by the Colombian Army over more than 130 people, including human rights defenders, national and international journalists, politicians, union leaders, and other members of the armed forces. After the public complaint, doubts persist about the possible use of international assistance offered by the United States to carry out these illegal surveillance activities.

This issue has aroused the concern of U.S. Congressmen, and at least 100 of them asked U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to demand Ivan Duque's government to commit itself to the implementation of the Peace Agreement to protect human rights defenders, including journalists. To date, however, there is no public response from the Government to this request.   

So far, the Colombian Government has not disclosed the findings of the disciplinary and criminal proceedings it announced in May 2020, when the complaint was published, nor has it responded to the petition rights submitted by FLIP and journalists victims. In this regard, the Foundation considers it essential and timely for international cooperation to ask Ivan Duque's government to speed up the results of the investigations to protect reporters who are at risk from these surveillance actions. In this regard, it is important for US authorities to take a thorough look at these processes so that the results will make it possible to know the truth about those responsible for the intelligence work and what the scope of these was. 

For FLIP, it is important that this report contains detailed information on the participation of Colombian State agents in the surveillance activities aimed at the press, with details on the activities, the objectives and their scope, in order to identify the chain of command involved in these actions. In addition, as proposed by the United States House of Representatives, the report should account on the use of resources to assist the security sector for these work coming from said country, and the response by the Department of State and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to these complaints. In this regard, the report is expected to answer the following questions to the Colombian State, posed by the reporters affected:

• Who gave the order to profile and surveil journalists and media by military intelligence agencies, which directly attacks free exercise of journalism guarantees in the country?
• One of the objectives of military intelligence is to protect human rights, and to prevent and counter internal or external threats related to national security. Are journalists and media under surveillance by the State a threat to national security? Which criteria justifies the implementation of activities against the press that are originally set up to combat crime?
• Who were the recipients and/or had access to the folders with the profiles and espionage to journalists, politicians, and human rights defenders?
• Does President Ivan Duque, the Ministry of Defense or any of his senior officials have knowledge of these illegal espionage activities? What actions will they take to ensure that journalists can practice their profession without being targeted for profiling, espionage, and stigmatization?

FLIP values positively the commitment of the U.S. authorities to advance oversight actions around these complaints involving the Colombian armed forces. This sends a strong message of rejection of this type of anti-democratic action, and highlights the need for rapid investigations by the Colombian Government and the judicial authorities.

For FLIP, it is essential to clarify the scope of these profiling and surveillance practices on journalists by military intelligence agencies, to assess the risk they pose to journalists. These actions violate Colombian State's obligations in the press freedom area, which are inherent to authoritarian regimes, and call into question the right to an informed society and for guarantees for the free exercise of journalism in the country.  

In this sense, FLIP calls on the Department of State and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to publish their findings, if applicable, to be taken into account in the investigations that the Colombian State is advancing. This input can be vital for expediting disciplinary and criminal investigations, as well as risk assessments by the National Protection Unit, so that the necessary security measures to protect journalists who have been victims of violations of press freedom by the State are taken.

The Foundation also reiterates the call to the Prosecutor's Office of the Nation and the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation to make rapid progress in the investigations in order to clarify the criminal acts, determine the levels of responsibility of the aggressors and to impose the appropriate sanctions.

The Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP) rejects the pressure from Medellín's mayor, Daniel Quintero Calle, and of people close to the leader against W Radio radio station and El Espectador’s newspaper journalistic teams. FLIP was able to document that Quintero personally pressured media leaders and pointed out female journalists on being opposed to his government policy to evade questions about matters on which he must be held accountable.

In events related to this situation, municipal administration officials tried to force national and local media to improve the image of the mayor in exchange for payments on advertisement. Officers from Telemedellín TV channel asked W Radio to rectify a true publication, and that the media also agreed to sign and publish a joint statement with Telemedellín for disseminating as certain a situation that did not correspond to reality.

In an act of journalistic integrity, Caracol Radio (a company of which the W Radio is a part) emphatically rejected the aspirations of the mayor and his officers to censor the press, backed its female reporters in the face of the accusations of the leader, declared the offer for advertisement as an unacceptable blackmail, and refused to appear in a press release that sought to disseminate erroneous information to cover up what happened. For its part, the director of El Espectador newspaper did not give up to the judicial pressures announced by Quintero, and indicated that he should communicate with the female journalists who had questions to ask him and not with him as director.

Stigmatizing Statements to Journalists to Avoid his Duty to Provide Answers on Matters within his Competence

During the last week, a W Radio press team has been documenting complaints from women pointing to Quintero Calle of having committed sexual violence. The news reporting included contrasting the complaints of the two women with the mayor of Medellín. From that moment on, pressure began against the media investigating the issue and its sources.

Isabel Escobar, a journalist with W Radio Medellín, communicated with the Mayoralty of Medellín and its Secretary of Communications, Juan José Aux, and he replied that they needed two days to give an answer. Prior to offering his version, Quintero contacted Johana Fuentes, W Radio's deputy editor, and assured her that these allegations were a political attack and that he would only be on the air if the media had other testimonies to support the complaint.

Pressure to Media Directors from the Status of Mayor of Medellín for Personal Purposes

After Quintero's communications with W Radio’s female reporters, the leader contacted Caracol Radio's president to try to obstruct the publication. The mayor of Medellín reiterated the accusations on the female journalists as opponents of his government, and on having political interests on release of the story. Faced with this situation, the media supported the female journalists.

Despite pressure from the mayor of Medellín, the media decided to publish the complaints of the two women but, without further explanation, one of the affected women decided not to respond to the live interview. So far it is not known whether the mayor or mayor's officers interfered with this decision, but FLIP is aware that a person close to the mayor made contact with the source, and made reference to W Radio’s female journalists on events which by that time were only knew to the journalists and the source.

Then, Mariángela Urbina and Viviana Bohórquez, journalists of Las Igualadas project at El Espectador newspaper, resumed the investigation and contacted Quintero on June 19 to find out his version. The leader did not respond to the questions, but did contact Fidel Cano, director of El Espectador newspaper, to persuade him about the publication. Cano referred him to answer the questions Mariángela and Viviana had for him. The Mayor announced that he would leave everything to his lawyer, and that they could be subject to legal action if the publication affected his reputation.

Attempt to Use Official Advertisement Funds for Personal Purposes

In view of W Radio's refusal to suspend the publication, on June the 18th officers of Telemedellín (media agency of the mayor's office) contacted Caracol Radio to offer it a five million Colombian pesos advertisement contract in which it was intended to include the commitment of the media to make two interviews with Daniel Quintero highlighting the family side of the mayor as a father. The management of Caracol Radio Medellín rejected the offer on the grounds that the company does not enter into such advertising contracts. In an interview with W Radio the mayor assured that no one on his team was going to be fired for what happened: “No, no, definitely not, this is absurd. I take care of my people, I love my people, I have a good team, it is a team of young people, very young, yes, but we are all learning here (...) if there was a mistake in Telemedellín, it will be corrected and be will move forward”.

For FLIP, it is unacceptable for the mayor to hide in a learning curve that does not exempt no one from complying with the law, since on May the 20th FLIP offered a workshop on the uses of official advertising and on the prohibition of the use of the official advertisement as a censorship mechanism, in which the team of the Communications Department of Medellín took part. Nine mayor's officials attended the workshop, including Juan Felipe Upegui, who was one of those directly involved in the blackmail attempt through the advertisement payment to ensure a favorable treatment for the mayor in Caracol Radio. In addition to the workshop exercises, a good practice guide on the use of official advertising was eventually shared with the officials.

Request from Telemedellín to Misrepresent What Happened

Once the W Radio published that the “Mayor’s Office of Medellín offered advertisement in the midst of complaints against Daniel Quintero,” Telemedellín’s officials asked the media to rectify a truthful story and also to agree to sign a joint press release to cover up the seriousness of the events and to make the censorship attempt to be seen as a common communication error. The media refused, and Telemedellín published a confusing statement, which was not due to what happened either.

Only until the time the mayor's office exhausted all options to try to censor the press, the mayor finally agreed to give an interview to W Radio.

Unauthorized Access into the Accounts of Journalists on Social Networks

Between Tuesday the 23rd and Wednesday the 24th of June, Viviana Bohórquez, Juan David Ortiz and Isabel Escobar - journalists who have been covering these events - reported to FLIP on notifications of access to their twitter accounts where unauthorized logins from Antioquia were noticed. Attacks that occur against journalists who have been covering the complaints against mayor Quintero as their common denominator, and that happen in parallel with all these attempts by the mayor and his officials to censor the press during the last week. Similarly, journalist Ana Cristina Restrepo also warned of an atypical operation in her e-mail account, in which the arrival in time of her usual column in El Colombiano newspaper in which she expressed her opinion on the complaints against Quintero was frustrated.

These acts increase concerns about guarantees on journalistic activity in Medellín and on the activation of invasive actions against journalists who are covering these complaints.

An Administration that Recursively Evades the Social Control of Media and Deploys Public Officials to Address a Matter that is Unrelated to their Work in the Mayor's Office

FLIP estimates that at least twenty officials among mayor's advisers, the communications secretary, the press chief, officers of Telemedellín and their respective work teams have been having the time they are paid with public resources to attend to a matter that although concerns Daniel Quintero, does not involve the Mayor's Office of Medellín, and therefore the use of public resources is questionable for matters not related to the role for which they work in the municipal administration.

If this exaggerated deployment of officials has served anything, it is to delay and hinder the answers to legitimate questions that journalists from different local and national media have. A handful of officials, who far from making it easier for the mayor's office responses to arrive more efficiently and in a timely manner to the press, seem to be in charge of distracting, evading, and delaying the responses of the municipal government and Quintero himself.

For FLIP, this leads to two scenarios: Either there is no control of information (an unlikely scenario in such a large and robust administration), or there is a deliberate intention not to respond to those who exercise social control over public topics from the media. Mayor's office officers manage the expectation of a response for the purpose of delaying the publications.

In the documentation of this case, FLIP was able to corroborate the situation described by journalists. The Foundation tried to contact the mayor, but it was not possible. For this reason, at the closing of this press release, FLIP publicly asks some questions so that these can be included when Mayor Quintero considers answering them.

---------

FLIP expresses its concern about these pressures, because a diligent exercise in the journalistic role, as it is to contrast information with sources, cannot turn into a timely scenario for public officials to try to exert pressure to prevent the publication of investigations that may affect them.

FLIP requires Daniel Quintero Calle to comply with its obligation to ensure press freedom. This implies: (i) to refrain from making stigmatizing statements to journalists who question him, (ii) to allow timely access to public information in accordance with Law 1712 of 2014, (iii) to prohibit the use of pressure on the media and journalists through official advertisement in all the entities under his charge, and to sanction in an exemplary fashion whoever does so; and (iv) to publicly reject violence against the press that occurs within the municipality under his charge, especially that aimed against journalists who have criticized him or his management.

FLIP announces that it will follow up this case, in particular to monitor that there is no future retaliation through official advertisement and/or actions that may individually affect the job stability of journalists who have followed up on these complaints.

In the absence of corrective measures and sanctions from the mayor's office, FLIP requests the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation to investigate what has happened in order to determine the responsibility of the officials of  Medellín’s government in the face of these pressures against the press, to ensure that the corresponding disciplinary sanctions are proportional to the gravity of what is denounced here.

-------------------

Questions that Could not be Asked to Mayor Daniel Quintero:

• What were the communications that were made from the mayor's office, and what was the purpose of the calls to media leaders? Why does he not answer journalists' questions and, instead, quickly and insistently turns to media leaders?
  
  
• What is the basis of the constant accusations against journalists as opposition to his government policy, that were conveyed on at least two occasions to the directors of Caracol Radio and W Radio? What reaction did you expect from your interlocutors when you gave these stigmatizing labels against the female reporters?
  
  
• What kind of judicial actions against El Espectador newspaper did you refer to in your communication with Fidel Cano? How do you explain the announcement of a judicial action on an unpublished content? Are you aware of judicial harassment restrictions on the press when these are triggered from positions with public responsibilities?
  
  
• On the understanding that the allegations made on you are not related to your role as mayor, and that personally affect you, how do you justify the deployment of public officials to deal with a personal matter?
  
  
• Article 10 of the Anti-Corruption Statute reads: “The use of official advertising, or any other mechanism for the dissemination of official programs and policies for the promotion of public servants, political parties or candidates, or that make use of their voice, image, name, symbol, logo or any other identifiable element that could lead to confusion is prohibited". Could you explain how your administration guarantees compliance with this law and imposes sanctions to those who skip this obligation?
  
  
• What is the commitment of the Mayor´s Office of Medellín to guarantee the journalistic work of the media that are critical to the policy of the municipal government? How do you feel that four journalists who have followed up on complaints against you report accesses to their Twitter accounts or abnormal situations with their digital communications?
  
  
• What are the policies carried out by the Mayor's Office of Medellín for the assignment of official advertisement contracts?
  
  
• What are the corrective measures that the Mayor's Office of Medellín will take to punish the officers responsible for proposing an official advertisement contract to Caracol Radio, bearing in mind that you assure that this was not a guideline of the Mayor's Office?

 

 *This release was updated at 12:12 pm on June 25.

Timely, truthful, up-to-date, and decentralized information is an essential public asset for dealing with the pandemic with democratic credentials to address the crisis and ensure fundamental rights during isolation. When citizens have quality information, they adopt the measures for their care, and follow the recommendations of the health authorities. Recognizing the vital importance of journalism at this juncture, the Foundation for Press Freedom -FLIP- shares a preliminary balance on the variables affecting a free press in Colombia during the pandemic.

1. Journalists and Press Workers Face Biological Risks.

The National Government, on behalf of the State as a whole, must ensure the exercise of a free and independent press freedom, so that it can disseminate information that contributes to public debate on issues of general interest. It is not enough to declare the telecommunications service as an essential service, if it is not accompanied by concrete measures to:

a. Protect journalists from biological risk. At least 16 reported having approached people who were infected or possibly infected during the exercise of their trade. Four journalists maintained voluntary isolation, and 11 were tested for the diagnosis of Covid-19, but delays of up to 17 days in the delivery of the results were noticed. One of these cases was the one of Paco Lasso, who died on May 7, 2020 after contracting the new coronavirus. FLIP has also had off the record knowledge of positive cases of Covid-19 in workers of a media outlet; a case in which we respect the discretion of the media company in the handling, and in which we especially value the care diligence that has been exercised with respect to that worker and all the people in his/her environment.  

b. Correct Mobility Difficulties for news reporting. According to Decree 749 of 2020, journalists are exempted from mobility restrictions. However, some authorities also require accreditation of this status through qualifications, labor certificates and/or ID cards. This is contrary to article 20 of the Colombian Constitution, which stipulates that the right to report is the head of all individuals in the Colombian territory. In addition, in some cases, to be bound by this exception, it is essential to register on platforms that require access to personal data and georeferencing in real time. This can pose a risk to communicators and their sources.

c. Clarify the conditions for the use of the media to disseminate official information1. Some measures recognize and value the right to inform and be informed, to demand that media disseminate official information. Nonetheless, the lack of clarity about applicable parameters can lead to arbitrariness. Resolution 844 of 2020 provides for the obligation of mass media to disseminate free information on the health situation and the protection measures adopted for the population, in accordance with information provided by the Ministry of Health. The scope of these terms and restricting the media as mere amplifiers of official information, opens the door for State enforcement of content, one of the mechanisms of the propaganda and prior censorship prohibited by the Colombian Constitution.  

d. Have the resources to ensure the sustainability of the sector. As of May 31, there is knowledge of at least 48 cases of journalists and media outlets that have been affected by the health emergency, 32 of them are from the media and reporters who are having an impact in their finances. This situation is most serious in regions that are under the threat of being left without local media and information. The different interpretations of Directive 16 of the Attorney General’s Office of the Nation, implied a reduction of the advertising budget, aggravating the situation; government financial relief has focused on open television and community media, leaving a wide range of media outlets with an specific lack of protection.

2. A Hostile Environment Against Freedom of the Press.

The FLIP has warned on recurring behaviors among local authorities that affect the flow of information. The public denigration of journalistic work and the stigmatization of some reporters and media, undoubtedly has an inhibitory effect. These hostile behaviors against the press seek to silence the voices that criticize the management of the emergency. This limits citizen oversight and participation. The situation in Medellín, Sucre, Cesar and Nariño, where government authorities have not refrained from denigrating opinions against the press, is worrying.

In this regard, it is worth recalling that public authorities and officials must guarantee the right to freedom of the press, and facilitate a public interest debate, even if this means tolerating criticism on their management. Such a debate must not be subject to opinions by official entities, nor to obstructions or censorship, which are expressly prohibited in the Political Constitution, being a damaging tool that limits pluralism, thus the very functioning of democracy in a State.

3. Difficulties in Accessing Information.

Access to public information is not being fully guaranteed, at least for the following reasons:

• The response time to petition rights was extended as a result of the emergency by Decree 491 of 2020.

• Law and order reasons have become a recurring argument for refusing to provide information on the level of contagion.

• The guideline that the only sources authorized to provide this information are the National Institute of Health and the Ministry of Health, limits access to local information.

• The lack of clear rules for the use of digital spaces (Whatsapp, Facebook, Twitter) as an official channel for public officers has facilitated arbitrariness, such as not responding to uncomfortable questions, excluding on the basis of discriminatory criteria (editorial line, media size, media type, audience size) and blocking critical comments.

This does not allow an agile flow of information and does not respond to territorial information needs. So, FLIP calls on the Attorney General's Office of the Nation to establish guidelines for the use of platforms and social media, that guarantee access to information, and to also actively exercise the preferential disciplinary power over misconducts for preventing and impeding access to information. 

Finally, FLIP declares a risk of State capture of the public debate, in which the expectation of a simple amplification of the official voice by national and local governments, coupled with an operational reduction of the media due to the financial crisis they are going through, results in a very limited environment of social scrutiny to the public policies under way. FLIP encourages the audience to financially contribute to the media, and invites national and local authorities to assess the right to an informed society as a public interest asset in the pandemic, by enabling measures that effectively address the risk of extinction of the media and the capture of the public debate. 

 

¹ Decree 460 of 2020 ordered community radio network to be willing and responsive to information needs in the midst of the emergency in the face of specific issues. More recently, media support was expanded through Resolution 844 of 2020, issued by the Ministry of Health, which extends the health emergency until August 31, 2020, and orders all sound broadcasting stations, television programmers and other mass media, to disseminate freely the information provided by this ministry, in high-audience hours or time slots, on the health situation and protection measures for the population, in accordance with the guidelines of the Ministry of Information and Communication Technologies. 

May 9, 2020 marks one year since the murder of Colombian documentary filmmaker Mauricio Lezama. Who was Lezama and why his absence in Arauca is second to none?

Bullets That Put Out Fireflies

 

By Yulieth Mora G.

“They collected the corpse on a tray, like a dead animal, as the man of the funeral home did” said Tonni Villamizar in an interview when he referred to the murder of his colleague, audiovisual producer, Mauricio Lezama.

People from the community said that the bullet-ridden body laid down for more than four hours. Lying in front of the regional headquarters of the National Apprenticeship Service (SENA) in La Esmeralda settlement, 20 minutes from the town of Arauquita, Arauca. It was Thursday, May 9, 2019. “No one wanted to pick up the body, not even the army”, Villamizar said.

Ricardo Llaín was with Lezama behind the road when two men on motorbikes shot at him. One of the seven bullets hit Llaín's arm and, as he could, ran with a bullet in his arm and looked for protection in the premises of a shop. The other six bullets did not give Lezama any time to react. Because six bullets, four directly to the head and two to the body, give no time at all.

On the other hand, the killers did have all the time to hurt one man, kill another and flee. Even in those four hours of neglect from the police and the military forces, someone also had enough time to take the camera that Lezama had hung on his neck, his cell phone, and to collect the bullet cartridges.

A man from the community who knew Lezama, said: “if they don’t go out (the Police and the Army) because they are afraid, imagine what can happen to us”.

Sandra Lezama, sister of the audiovisual director, said that, “twenty minutes after the criminal act, a photo of Mauricio appeared in social media. He appeared on the ground with his camera, with his bag, along with the feet of the people around him. They called the Judicial Police, and the latter said they could not enter the area if the Army is not present. They passed the buck from one party to the other. Yes, it took hours before the funeral home had to remove the body because no authority arrived”.

A week after the murder of Mauricio Lezama, the news passed from a municipality in eastern Colombia to international media, when the Colombian delegation at the Cannes Film Festival held posters denouncing the criminal acts. However, media exposure was not, and has not been, sufficient for the Prosecutor's Office of the Nation to deliver results.

The Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP) asked the following to the Prosecutor's Office in a petition right*: Has the first hypothesis that homicide motives are related to the exercise of journalism been addressed within the investigation? The answer: “the hypothesis that the homicide is related to journalism is not being considered, since the victim was not a journalist”.

So, who was Mauricio Lezama and what was his trade?

Mauricio Lezama was a workshop facilitator, cultural manager, producer and audiovisual director, legal representative of Indosana film production company, father of two children, husband, ex-husband, son, a puppets guy, friend, actor, rebel, canvases artist, the vegetarian recipes guy, a member of the Hare Krishna community, storyteller, a person who never engaged in ordinary life, traveler, departmental film counselor and director of the Arauca Film Festival.

Lezama was, but will no longer be, because someone decided that he had be killed, and that had to be done during those days of casting for the short film named Las luciérnagas vuelan en mayo (Fireflies Fly in May), the project that had him busy full time thanks to the economic stimulus for Regional Stories, granted by the Film Development Fund of the Ministry of Culture.

A Day of May

Arauca, May 3, 1984. An armed man breaks into a pharmacy in La Esmeralda settlement. That man shoots the owners of the place: a married couple. He dies immediately. She gets a shot on her face. The woman is the midwife of the town, a recognized leader of Unión Patriótica political party. She usually helps to give birth to the town's mothers; but that night, she resorts to darkness to save herself from all that can be saved. Her name is Mayo Villarreal. She survives, but she will take for years the burden of a disfigured face, a reminder of violence in Arauca.

That is the plot of Las luciérnagas vuelan en mayo. A story that Tonni Villamizar wrote based on his family's history, the same one that Mauricio Lezama was obsessed with directing. Until, ironically, he was murdered one day in May.

Deafening Silence

Losing a child is indescribable. That he gets murdered, is a horror. Martha Isabel Muñoz tries to put words on the vacuum that Mauricio left in her home and family. She was his foster mother.

“It's very hard to revive the pain.” Feeling that knot in the chest. Mauricio arrived here when he was 16 years old. He was very close to his dad. He went to study arts and went back here to do painting, theater, and puppets. What we have had to face has been extremely hard. The Prosecutor's Office is conducting interviews, and there are several versions, but there is still nothing definitive. Excuse me for not talking more about it, but this pain continues and is revived every time we are asked”.

Mauricio's biological mother died seven months before he was killed, and the date coincided with the delivery of the economic stimulus to make the story about ‘Mayo’. Those were difficult times, but there was hope.

“Before my mum died, I told Mauricio: ‘come here, because things in Arauca are very tough and you have a lot to give’. He told me that he was going to finish the ‘Mayo’ project and then he was coming to Ecuador. That was the hardest thing for me”, says Sandra Lezama, who recently was in Colombia, among other things, to carry out the procedures before the Prosecutor's Office for the murder of her brother.

The day Sandra arrived at Colombia to be with her brother in vigil, she didn't imagine hundreds of people were going to be found in a cemetery in Arauca, people who also wanted to say goodbye. “I don’t know where I drew strength from. We did a beautiful ceremony, we celebrated his life, his spirit. People came close and said to me: ‘your brother gave theater lessons to my son, and we remember him a lot in the house, ‘your brother performed a beautiful role’, ‘your brother cooked delicious dishes’, there was no one who did not say something good about him’.

After the murder, Sandra spent two weeks in Arauca trying to solve what she could, to solve items that nobody thinks one day might be a problem: What would she do with Mauricio’s belongings? his clothes, his shoes, the furniture, everything that had been suspended there in his apartment. Sandra called the liaison person at the Prosecutor's Office to go check the apartment, the notes, anything, and to look for clues about the murder's motives. No, she could not wait any longer, they had to return home. She got rid of some things and others gave them away.

Today, few dare to talk about the future of Las luciérnagas vuelan en Mayo. Much less of the production of those other stories that Mauricio Lezama was preparing. There is more talk about the shooting of 'Lez-ama, vivir filmando', a documentary prepared by director Mónica Moya about the life of the filmmaker, where the debate opens on what cinema is and why it is done. Unfortunately, Mauricio, which for years chose to stay behind the cameras to direct films, will be in front of them this time, but without being able to answer any of the questions.

 

Arauca's Mutism

Violence touches everything, touches even the intangible, touches voices until they turn off, and speaks silence. But when violence is installed it proclaims censorship as a flag.

“Non-state armed groups violently control people’s daily lives… they impose their own rules and, to ensure compliance, threaten civilians on both sides of the border”. This is what the report named “The Guerrillas Are the Police” tells, which was recently published by United States NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW), who analyzes the situation in Arauca.

If in this area of the country, surviving amid gunfire is already a feat, issuing and receiving information and exercising a fundamental right can trigger a tragedy overnight.

This is indicated by FLIP figures that confirm the resurgence of attacks on journalists in recent years: there were 9 attacks in 2017, 16 for 2018, and in 2019 FLIP registered a significant increase, with 26 attacks on journalists in Arauca.

In addition to the above, data from the Center of Studies of FLIP is added, which considers Arauca as a ‘department under silence’ because of the limited supply of media, which reaches only 35 for 267,000 inhabitants in the whole department.

These precarious conditions for sharing information of interest to all, have made cinema and other forms of expression a tool that makes the banner of censorship to waver. In recent years, regional cinema has taken flight, but after the assassination of Mauricio Lezama violence has set a remarkably high price for the generations who continue to narrate the conflict: paying with life.

 

------------

*The investigation into the murder of Mauricio Lezama continues to be under enquiry. There has been no progress. The only new event in the case is that it was reassigned to the First Prosecutor's Office Attached before the Superior Court, under prosecutor Luisa Obando, attached to the Special Investigation Unit in the city of Bogotá, D.C.