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.

Today, April 30, 2020, UNESCO announced that Colombian journalist Jineth Bedoya Lima has been awarded with the Guillermo Cano Press Freedom Prize, 2020 edition.

The UNESCO Guillermo Cano Award is led by the Guillermo Cano Isaza Foundation and Unesco, with the support of the Helsingin Sanomat Foundation and the Namibia Media Trust. It is the highest worldwide recognition in the field of press freedom.

In all its editions, this award has been a tribute to the legacy and courage of Colombian journalist Guillermo Cano Isaza. For 24 years, the award has traveled the world, recognizing courageous journalists who have stood out for their contributions to the defense and promotion of free journalism.

This year, the global award for an outstanding Colombian journalist arrives for the first time to its home country, to highlight journalist Jineth Bedoya, deputy editor of El Tiempo newspaper, director of the No es Hora de Callar (This is no Time to Remain Silent) campaign, defender of women's rights, and champion against impunity for crimes against the press. Jineth is a survivor of the kidnapping, torture and sexual violence she suffered in 2000, when he was part of the judicial newsroom of El Espectador newspaper, the same media that mister Guillermo Cano Isaza led until the last day of his life.

For FLIP, today is an incredibly special and emotional day. We have had the honor of first-hand knowing the rigor and persistence of Jineth Bedoya in the struggle for a free press and against the impunity of her own case. Since 2010, we have supported the judicial representation of her case before the Colombian criminal system and before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, an organization that this year will evaluate the international liability of the Colombian State in her case, that was declared as a crime against humanity since 2012.

We call on the Colombian society to applaud Jineth Bedoya for this well-deserved recognition. Her story and struggle are as inspiring as they are important for a country where violence against women, attacks on the press and censorship continue to be attacks on civil liberties that, unfortunately, exist in Colombia.

“I believe that UNESCO’s Guillermo Cano Award is that: to show the world that voices often are much more powerful than the anger and rage of those who want to silence us”: Jineth Bedoya.

“When I met Jineth, I was struck by her tenacity and courage, but I was also shocked to realize how hard the struggle for justice is. Your story, Jineth, is an example for everyone, to continue to advance in the search for justice without hesitation": Guilherme Canela, advisor on Communication and Information of the UNESCO Office.

Today, April 30, 2020, UNESCO announced that Colombian journalist Jineth Bedoya Lima has been awarded with the Guillermo Cano Press Freedom Prize, 2020 edition.

The UNESCO Guillermo Cano Award is led by the Guillermo Cano Isaza Foundation and Unesco, with the support of the Helsingin Sanomat Foundation and the Namibia Media Trust. It is the highest worldwide recognition in the field of press freedom.

In all its editions, this award has been a tribute to the legacy and courage of Colombian journalist Guillermo Cano Isaza. For 24 years, the award has traveled the world, recognizing courageous journalists who have stood out for their contributions to the defense and promotion of free journalism.

This year, the global award for an outstanding Colombian journalist arrives for the first time to its home country, to highlight journalist Jineth Bedoya, deputy editor of El Tiempo newspaper, director of the No es Hora de Callar (This is no Time to Remain Silent) campaign, defender of women's rights, and champion against impunity for crimes against the press. Jineth is a survivor of the kidnapping, torture and sexual violence she suffered in 2000, when he was part of the judicial newsroom of El Espectador newspaper, the same media that mister Guillermo Cano Isaza led until the last day of his life.

For FLIP, today is an incredibly special and emotional day. We have had the honor of first-hand knowing the rigor and persistence of Jineth Bedoya in the struggle for a free press and against the impunity of her own case. Since 2010, we have supported the judicial representation of her case before the Colombian criminal system and before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, an organization that this year will evaluate the international liability of the Colombian State in her case, that was declared as a crime against humanity since 2012.

We call on the Colombian society to applaud Jineth Bedoya for this well-deserved recognition. Her story and struggle are as inspiring as they are important for a country where violence against women, attacks on the press and censorship continue to be attacks on civil liberties that, unfortunately, exist in Colombia.

“I believe that UNESCO’s Guillermo Cano Award is that: to show the world that voices often are much more powerful than the anger and rage of those who want to silence us”: Jineth Bedoya.

“When I met Jineth, I was struck by her tenacity and courage, but I was also shocked to realize how hard the struggle for justice is. Your story, Jineth, is an example for everyone, to continue to advance in the search for justice without hesitation": Guilherme Canela, advisor on Communication and Information of the UNESCO Office.

We worked in partnership with IFEX to produce this video about the role played by journalists in defending freedom of expression and the right to information.

See the story of Guillermo Cano Isaza, Jineth Bedoya Lima and Edison Molina and their fidhts against impunity.

This video pays tribute to all Colombian journalists who have been threatened, attacked, or murdered because of their work.

El pasado jueves 12 de abril, la Fiscalía General de la Nación negó la solicitud para declarar el asesinato del periodista Nelson Carvajal Carvajal como un crimen de lesa humanidad. La FLIP rechaza esta decisión que pone al borde de la impunidad un delito que hizo mucho daño al periodismo del Huila.

Hoy, 20 años después del asesinato, fecha en que prescribiría el caso, la FLIP presenta una apelación para que la Fiscalía General de la Nación revoque la decisión tomada por la Fiscal del caso.

La solicitud original fue presentada el pasado 26 de marzo por la Sociedad Interamericana de Prensa (SIP), el Robert F. Kennedy for Human Rights y la Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa (FLIP)ante el riesgo de que prescriba el caso. La SIP y el RFK for Human Rights, además, son los representantes legales de la familia del periodista huilense ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (Corte IDH), donde se adelanta un proceso contra el Estado colombiano por sus múltiples omisiones en este caso.

El caso de Nelson Carvajal es un delito de lesa humanidad. Las actividades que desempeñó Carvajal como periodista le significaron amenazas y posteriormente que fuera asesinado. Según la investigación de la Fiscalía y las conclusiones de la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, el crimen fue planificado y cometido por una alianza entre funcionarios públicos locales, empresarios, sicarios y miembros de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia –FARC-. El homicidio sucedió en un contexto de ataques generalizados contra la prensa y alianzas criminales entre autoridades y grupos armados al margen de la ley.

A juicio de la FLIP, estas son las principales fallas del Estado en el caso Carvajal:

• La época en la que ocurrió el crimen estuvo marcada por una excesiva violencia contra los periodistas. No obstante, el Estado no hizo nada para evitar que esta situación escalara hasta el asesinato de Carvajal. En 1997 asesinaron a 6 periodistas y antes de la muerte de Carvajal ya habían asesinado a otros 2 en 1998.

• Una de las fiscales del caso fue amenazada y un testigo clave para el proceso fue asesinado. Esto ocurrió después de que señalara a reconocidos políticos de la región y a un empresario como autores intelectuales del crimen, con apoyo de integrantes de las FARC.

• Pocos meses después de ese señalamiento, la Fiscalía, sin justificación, precluyó la investigación en contra de uno de estos personajes públicos de Pitalito. Los demás ya se habían beneficiado de absolución o preclusión de la investigación años antes por la negligencia en la investigación.

• El Estado ha culpado a la familia de Carvajal acusándolos de negligentes, sin compadecerse de que estas personas tuvieron que afrontar amenazas y el dolor de la muerte de su ser querido.

• Durante una audiencia en la Corte IDH, los representantes del Estado afirmaron que la situación de violencia contra la prensa es un asunto del pasado en Colombia. Esto sin tener en cuenta los aumentos de amenazas y diferentes ataques a la prensa que ocurren año a año.

• En esa misma audiencia, los representantes del Estado presentaron políticas fallidas como avance en la garantía de la libertad de expresión. Ejemplo de esto es una política pública de libertad de expresión adelantada por el Ministerio del Interior, que después de cinco años de formulación resultó engavetada.

La decisión de la Fiscalía de rechazar la declaratoria de lesa humanidad en este caso da más argumentos a la Corte IDH para condenar al Estado colombiano por su negligencia en la búsqueda de justicia en este crimen.

La FLIP exige a la Fiscalía General de la Nación que revoque su decisión, que declare el crimen de Carvajal como un delito de lesa humanidad y que implemente medidas efectivas para investigar y sancionar a los autores intelectuales.

El 19 de marzo de 2010 fue asesinado el periodista de la emisora La Voz de Montería, Clodomiro Castilla, en el departamento de Córdoba. El día en que ocurrieron los hechos, el reportero se encontraba en la terraza de su casa leyendo y aproximadamente a las 9 de la noche dos hombres llegaron en moto y le dispararon en ocho ocasiones. 

Castilla se destacaba por sus investigaciones y denuncias sobre hechos de corrupción en las instituciones de su departamento, además de los nexos entre políticos de la región y grupos paramilitares. Por su labor periodística, Castilla fue testigo en procesos judiciales en la Corte Suprema de Justicia por la infiltración de estructuras ilegales en las instituciones del Estado.

Es de conocimiento de la FLIP que, luego de ocho años del asesinato del periodista, el proceso continúa en indagación preliminar en la Fiscalía General de la Nación. Según fuentes consultadas por la Fundación, existe material probatorio suficiente para vincular a presuntos responsables al proceso, sin embargo, esto no se ha hecho.

La ausencia de vinculación formal implica que la investigación se mantiene sin mayores avances y el paso del tiempo hace que el esclarecimiento de la verdad sobre lo sucedido sea cada vez más complejo. Esto es particularmente preocupante si se considera que una de las formas de resolver delitos contra periodistas es a través de la información que los autores materiales puedan aportar al proceso.

La FLIP advierte que el constante cambio y reasignación de fiscales interfiere en la continuidad de la investigación penal y ello se refleja en la falta de resultados efectivos en los procesos. En el caso de Clodomiro Castilla, al menos 3 fiscales distintos han estado a cargo de su caso en tan solo 8 años. Esta situación impide que se identifiquen y vinculen a los presuntos autores y perpetúa la impunidad que impera en este crimen.

La FLIP le solicita a la Fiscalía General de la Nación que con el material probatorio con el que cuenta actualmente vincule formalmente a los presuntos responsables del homicidio. Adicionalmente, la Fundación hace un llamado a la entidad para que el caso de Clodomiro Castilla sea priorizado en la Unidad de Derechos Humanos con el fin de que haya celeridad procesal y sea posible condenar a los responsables del crimen. Al respecto, el principio 9 de la Declaración de Principios sobre Libertad de Expresión indica que “el asesinato, secuestro, intimidación, amenaza a los comunicadores sociales (…) viola los derechos fundamentales de las personas y coarta severamente la libertad de expresión. Es deber de los Estados prevenir e investigar estos hechos, sancionar a sus autores y asegurar a las víctimas una reparación adecuada”.

Por Pedro Vaca Villarreal*

En febrero de 2017 denunciamos que la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) no ha sido diligente con el trámite del caso por el asesinato del periodista Guillermo Cano Isaza. Un año después las explicaciones no llegan y sigue en entredicho la transparencia de este organismo internacional.

El caso Guillermo Cano llegó a la CIDH en 1997, once años después del asesinato, pero se congeló en el año 2001. El trámite es extraño: la CIDH abrió las puertas a una solución amistosa entre el Estado y la familia Cano el 16 de febrero del año 2001, pero esta oferta fue rechazada cuatro días después por la Sociedad Interamericana de Prensa (SIP). Tres días más tarde, el 23 de febrero, la CIDH cerró el trámite conciliatorio, decidió unificar el caso con otro proceso sin mayor explicación y declaró la responsabilidad del Estado Colombiano emitiendo una serie de recomendaciones que jamás vigiló en 17 años. La CIDH tardó alrededor de una semana en agotar fases que normalmente le pueden tomar más de 5 años. Acelerar el camino a la impunidad no es un mérito, es un error que se debe enmendar.

Nunca dieron aviso a los familiares y, salvo los Comisionados de esa época y los funcionarios de la Cancillería Colombiana, nadie supo sobre esta decisión hasta el mes de diciembre de 2016 cuando la FLIP tuvo acceso a parte del expediente. La CIDH sabe lo que está pasando, pero ha preferido callar. Un malabar procesal en un caso tan emblemático que ha motivado a la UNESCO a otorgar cada año el premio global “Guillermo Cano a la libertad de prensa”. La CIDH hizo y mantiene una maniobra opaca, una acción más cercana a contribuir a la inmerecida reputación del Estado Colombiano que a los estándares interamericanos de justicia, transparencia, reparación y garantías de no repetición. Ojalá se descubran los verdaderos intereses detrás de esta actuación.

La Comisión no solo hizo que se esfumara una expectativa de justicia para la familia Cano, el diario El Espectador, los 14 periodistas de este medio que han sido asesinados y para la sociedad colombiana que ha sido finalmente la mayor afectada por la falta de información producto de la violencia contra la prensa. La CIDH también impidió que el continente produjera a tiempo estándares que habrían resultado de gran utilidad para poner freno a la violencia contra periodistas. Hoy el hemisferio clama a gritos obligaciones perentorias y no simples recomendaciones para los Estados. México, Honduras, Guatemala, Brasil y Paraguay se suman al listado de países donde matar periodistas no tiene consecuencias. En Colombia, 47 periodistas han sido asesinados desde el día que la CIDH decidió meter en un cajón desconocido el caso de Guillermo Cano.

La CIDH está en Colombia por estos días en un periodo extraordinario de sesiones en el que puede hablar de todo, menos de Colombia. Sin embargo, nada nos impide hablar sobre ella y sea esta la oportunidad para preguntarle ¿Por qué no responde por el caso de Guillermo Cano?

Ojalá, con la misma fuerza con la que este organismo promociona la transparencia, brinden una respuesta. 

*Director ejecutivo de la Fundación para la Libertad de Prensa - FLIP

El juez segundo penal especializado de Florencia, Caquetá condenó a Yean Arlex Buenaventura Barreto por el homicidio del periodista Luis Antonio Peralta en hechos ocurridos en febrero de 2015. El sentido del fallo fue conocido el día de ayer 14 de diciembre en audiencia pública celebrada en la misma ciudad.

La Fundación Para la Libertad de Prensa (FLIP), quien representa legalmente a los familiares de las víctimas, apoyó la teoría del caso presentada por la Fiscalía según la cual Buenaventura obró bajo la modalidad de sicariato y en concurso con otras personas aliadas para silenciar las denuncias periodísticas de Peralta.

Luis Antonio Peralta era un hombre de 63 años, casado y padre de 4 hijos. Se había dedicado por más de 40 años al periodismo. Era un periodista crítico y antes de su asesinato se realizó reportajes e investigaciones sobre temas relacionados con corrupción administrativa, contratación estatal y extracción de petróleo.

Peralta era la voz más escuchada en esa región, era director y periodista de la emisora Linda Stéreo, filial de Caracol en El Doncello, Caquetá, y se había convertido en un asiduo crítico de políticos y gobernantes locales. Allí el micrófono era el medio por el cual denunciaba las ilegalidades de corrupción en la región.

El 14 de Febrero de 2015 dos sicarios que se movilizaban en una moto asesinaron a Luis Antonio Peralta en El Doncello. Sofía Quintero, su esposa, se encontraba con Peralta en ese momento y también fue baleada. Días después, Quintero también murió en el hospital como consecuencia de las heridas.

La FLIP reconoce esta condena como un avance en la lucha contra la impunidad en los crímenes contra la libertad de expresión en Colombia. Así mismo, espera que la decisión del juez contribuya a la identificación y sanción de los demás autores materiales e intelectuales del crimen de Peralta, quienes se encuentran hoy en libertad.

Desde 1977 hasta la fecha han sido asesinados 154 periodistas en Colombia por razones de oficio. Solo en cuatro casos han sido condenados los autores intelectuales de estos crímenes.

Una vez conocido el sentido del fallo, el juez anunció que realizará la lectura de la sentencia condenatoria de Yean Arlex Buenaventura el 28 de enero de 2018.

Efigenia Vásquez was deadly hurt while exercising her right to freedom of expression as a journalist in Purace, Cauca (southern Colombia). The Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP) considers the hypothesis that Vasquez’ death was due to a “multiple charge projectile” shot by an agent of the riot police ESMAD.

On October 8, the 31 years old journalist was covering and taking part of a protest held by members from the Kokonuko indigenous group. The protest was intended to claim communal property over an area in power of businessman Diego Angulo, owner of the touristic complex “Aguas Tibias”.

At 4 PM, the Kokonuko group blocked the entrance to “Aguas Tibias” where ESMAD officers were placed. ESMAD officers confronted the demonstrators, causing their retreat to the higher mountains. 40 natives, including Vasquez, were hurt, affirmed to FLIP Governor Isneldo Avirama.

From 18 to 20 October, FLIP representatives went to the Kokonuko area in Purace, Cauca. FLIP held conversations with members of the indigenous group present at the time of the events as well as with persons with close relationship to the query being developed by the Prosecutor’s office and with Vasquez’ family. FLIP queried about the facts and about the general conditions for freedom of expression of the Kokonuko group.

Cauca is a silenced zone. A significant part of the territory does not have any media producing local information. Among its 42 municipalities, 24 have no media, 16 have some local information and just two of them, Popayán and Santander de Quilichao, have a minimum amount of variety. Among the 75 media existing in Cauca, only 22 have informative or news centered programs.

Renacer Kokonuko 90.7 FM operates in this context of silence. It is the only media existing in Purace and it is located in a small house inside the indigenous area. It only counts with the minimal equipment required to broadcast. It’s broadcast power is 250 kw, which only allows it to cover 10 round kilometers. For this reason, around 40% of Purace’s people are not being able to access the station’s signal. The majority of the nine persons working at the station are peasants dedicated to farming as their main activity. They work on their free time as volunteers at Renacer.

Part of the station’s content are related to self-government. In its 15 years of existence, Renacer has built up enough capacity to inform about confrontations with authorities. “The indigenous council demands us to be present in order to gather evidences of what is going on”, says Emildre Avirama, who works at Renacer. Regarding these subjects, the radio station provides orientation to Purace’s people on how to act. “When confrontations arise, our colleagues say to us ¡Tell everyone that the community is needed in the place! Says Avirama.

On 13 June, the community was preparing a protest in order to demand the government to award property over the “Aguas Tibias” area. However, according to ex gobernor Fabio Avirama, at 5 am ESMAD surrounded the radio station and attempted to come into it. Journalist Jesus Melengue was there. “They wanted to shut down communications: damage the equipment in order to prevent broadcasting”. Melengue alerted the other members of the community, who reached the area. “The attack against our communicators was prevented hanks to the community’s bravery”, said Avirama to FLIP.

On 12 july, during a new wave of confrontations, electricity went out in Renacer Kokonuko for several hours. The latter impeded the communicators to inform about the protest. According to the communicators, there is no doubt that this was executed by the Police. “It is not appropriate to them that we spread reality”, says Emildre Hol Avirama.

On July, FLIP attempted, without response, to contact ESMAD in order to obtain their version on the facts. Last week, FLIP went to the police office in Popayan to inquire about these facts. Until now, no officer has acceded to talk to FLIP.

Two days after Vasquez’ death, a community member, whose name is reserved, was taking care of the station when a van and a motorcycle came. The journalist was asked to tell the name of the people working at Renacer. She demanded the persons to identify themselves and to explain their motives. The persons only insisted in demanding the communicators’ names. Since the journalist gave no response and did not open the door, the persons left claiming that they would return. Until now, they did not come back.

Since being a teenager, Efigenia was interested in communication. For that reason, starting at 17, she was invited to take part in capacity building events regarding self-communication and journalism. With the passing of time, Efigenia got to make part of the communications team at the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC) and to participate in Renacer Kokonuko. She contributed to the “Amanecer Indigena” and to the “minga” shows, dedicated to cultural subjects.

Efigenia took part of workshops held by the Deutsche Welle as well as in self-communication seminars in other parts of the country. She also was present in different international scenarios with indigenous journalists in Latin America.

Efigenia, when not cultivating strawberries, contributed to the radio station. However, since two years ago, she reduced her participation in Renacer. Her mother Ilda Astudillo says that Efigenia was in charge of her three sons since she got separated from her couple. Therefore, assisting to the radio station was hard.

The authorities still recognized Efigenia as a communicator and member of Renacer. According to Emildre Avirama, “her role in the radio station cannot be unrecognized”. Sitting in a plastic chair in her daughter’s house, Ilda Astudillo tells FLIP that “Efigenia was thinking on coming back to the radio station… but it wasn’t possible”.

On that Eighth of october Efigenia Vasquez went to the mobilization with her fellow community members in order to demand the communal property over the area belonging to Angulo. Emildre Avirama claims that Indigenous council ordered to cover the mobilization and its developments. Vasquez had the duty to contribute in documenting the facts: “she had the same task as us: to record” says Avirama.

FLIP had video confirmation that, around 4 pm and after the demonstrations started, ESMAD left “Aguas Tibias” and faced the community in an area inside indigenous territory.

Edward Avirama, coordinator of the Kokonuko indigenous guard, the demonstrators ran away in fear of the guns being used by ESMAD: “The community was throwing rocks from above the mountain and gunshots were heard”. Avirama tells that the situation escalated because the gunshots could come from firearms being used against the community.

Minutes after the gunshots were heard, Efigenia Vasquez fell to the ground: “that was the moment in which I asked for help to my colleague and we saw that she was badly hurt”, says Avirama. The guard members requested an ambulance to transfer the communicator to a medical center, but the vehicle never arrived. According to Avirama, the driver said that he was not allowed to enter the zone.

The emergency forced the community to look for a vehicle to transfer Vasquez to a health center. However, community members claim that the officers intimidated the driver: “ESMAD was located in part of the road and pointed the gun to discourage him from picking her”, says a native present the day of the facts.

A few hours after the confrontation, Efigenia Vasquez died while receiving treatment at San José de Popayán’s Hospital. According to forensics, her death was caused by the multiple wounds caused by the projectiles in her chest. Efigenia could have died due to pellets fired from a fire gun, such as a shotgun or to an shrapnel artifact’s explosion.

Two days after, Police Major General William Salamanca declared to Popayan media that the wounds received by Vásquez were not caused by ESMAD. “Pellet, artifacts and guns of this kind (unconventional) are not used by the Police”, said the Major General. “In my opinion, the indigenous are the ones to blame, those who came with her faces covered and using unconventional firearms are the ones who could have caused the journalist’s disease”, he concluded.

On 25 October, FLIP received a communication from the Colonel Pompy Arubal Pinzon Commander of Popayan´s Police. The communication reaffirmed the declarations given by General Salamanca and added that “The mentioned lady (Vásquez) was not undertaking communicative duties (...) au contraire, she had an active role in the different indigenous demonstrations”.

This version is not accepted by the indigenous authorities. “They have attacked us with ´recalzadas´”, says Edward Avirama referring to the multiple charge ammunition allegedly used by ESMAD. “The government can claim that they are just using gases, but we can affirm that they are making recalzadas”, says Avirama.

FLIP confirmed through sources close to the general prosecutor’s enquiry that there are three hypothesis for the case. First, Efigenia could have died due to a shrapnel explosive launched by either one of the parts in conflict. Second, Efigenia could have died due to a projectile coming from ESMAD. The third hypothesis points to Efigenia dying due to “friendly fire” when demonstrators unintentionally triggered an explosive and causing the deadly wounds.

FLIP had access to a one minute 20 video from the events. This material, part of the prosecutor’s enquiry, shows a general view of the confrontation until an explosion occurs. Afterwards, the camera focuses on a ESMAD member that points and shoots his grenade launcher towards an indigenous group. Efigenia was among those persons. The camera shows a person, apparently Efigenia, who is then aided by other natives.

The forensics report states that the anatomic trajectory of the wounds comes from the front to the back. This would help to conclude that the impact came from in front of her and that the projectile never came out of her body. Moreover, when Efigenia fell wounded, the Police was at approximately 56 meters from the natives. The autopsy showed that Efigenia’s wounds had no traces of gunpowder. This would show that there was more than one and a half meter of distance between the gun and the journalist’s body.

10 september 2015, when Flor Alba Nuñez was killed by gunmen in Pitalito Huila, was the last time in which a journalist was killed by reasons related to their journalistic work.

FLIP condemns the murder of Efigenia Vásquez while doing journalistic duties during the confrontations of October 8. This crime is also an attack against the Kokonuko’s freedom of expression and information.

FLIP encourages the General Prosecutor’s office to make a diligent enquiry to determine who caused Efigenia’s dead. Moreover, FLIP encourages that same office to determine if Efigenia’s killer acted following orders. FLIP also invites the Police and the indigenous authorities in Cauca to publicly condemn the use of nonconventional weapons by their members.

FLIP demands the Procurator to, based on FLIP statistics, establish monitoring measures and criteria based on attacks by ESMAD against the press. Such a duty should be done to seek an improvement of ESMAD use of force according to international standards.

________________________________________

Background

ESMAD has been a repeated aggressor of the press, especially during public demonstrations. Throughout the year, FLIP has registered six cases in which ESMAD agents attacks and stigmatizes journalists. On August, during a mining strike in Northeast Antioquia, officers accused a journalist of revolting. Moreover, the officers attempted to take the journalist’s camera (http://bit.ly/2h6Gxxd). On 15 August, Alexei Castaño of Caracol Radio and Red+ Noticias was attacked with tear gas by members of ESMAD during protests at Doña Juana´s landfill (http://bit.ly/2zAVMVG). On mid-july, during confrontations between peasants and public forzes in Meta, Heliana Montoya from Red de Medios Alternativos – Agencia Colombiana de Prensa Popular (REMA-Acpp) was attacked and detained by riot police (http://bit.ly/2h7pE5v). On May,  Pedro Garcia of El Turbión was seriously injured due to a bullet impact during Nasa indigenous group demonstrations in Cauca (http://bit.ly/2yP4p22).

Today, 25 May, marks 17 years since Jineth Bedoya Lima fell victim to a series of grave acts. 

Journalist Jineth Bedoya has had to give over 11 accounts of her abduction, torture and sexual assault at the hands of Colombian paramilitaries. On 1 March, she must testify again. IFEX and FLIP are calling on the Colombian Attorney General’s Office, the IACHR and the judge overseeing the trial to ensure that this time, justice is served.