OJ prohibits Amnesty International from visiting Virginia Laparra

This February 23 marks one year since the arrest of the former head of the Special Prosecutor’s Office once morest Impunity (Feci) of Quetzaltenango, Virginia Laparra, who is facing criminal proceedings for allegedly having leaked information under summary reservation.

The Eighth Court issued a sentence convicting Laparra of four years in commutable prison, which means that by paying a fine related to the crime she might recover her freedom, but this option is not valid for the former prosecutor because following said sentence, the MP opened her a second file, for allegedly disclosing information under confidentiality.

In 12 months of detention, Laparra’s state of health has deteriorated and now he needs surgery, but it has not yet been scheduled.

While the Guatemalan Social Security Institute (IGSS) scheduled an appointment to evaluate his health status for next May, the San Juan de Dios General Hospital has still not issued a medical report.

The case of the former prosecutor has drawn the attention of national and foreign organizations. A delegation from Amnesty International has visited the country this week with the intention of visiting Laparra and learning more regarding the criminal process, however, the Judicial Branch did not allow the visit to the Mariscal Zavala prison, where the former prosecutor is imprisoned.

Adeline Nau, Central America researcher for Amnesty International, spoke with Prensa Libre and explained the impressions they take from the case of Laparra, declared by the organization as a prisoner of conscience.

Why do you consider that Virginia Laparra is a prisoner of conscience and what does it mean?

It is a person who is deprived of liberty; whether in jail or under house arrest, and what is it just for defending Human Rights, for defending a cause or for an opinion.

After all an analysis that we have carried out allows us to reach this conclusion. The effect for Amnesty International when it declares a person a “prisoner of conscience” is that it calls for their immediate release. All this because there is no real, serious or objective reason that can justify that this person is in jail or detained.

Is declaring a prisoner of conscience common, or are they unusual cases?

It’s not Common. For Guatemala, the last time we declared a person a prisoner of conscience was in the situation of Bernardo Caal, declared a prisoner of conscience in July 2020, but due to the pandemic we had not been able to visit him.

On that occasion, they had given us permission to visit him in prison and we managed to interview him a little earlier, at the end of 2019.

How is the case of Virginia Laparra perceived outside of Guatemala?

It is perceived as a total injustice, and this is how we have analyzed it as Amnesty International. He is a person who was doing his work independently.

There are violations once morest Virginia in her human rights, that gives us a reading from the absurd, of how her human rights are denied and violated as revenge for having carried out her work independently, and for somehow embodying that fight once morest corruption and impunity.

Have you found other cases similar to Virginia Laparra in Guatemala?

We see what we call the misuse of criminal law, criminalization, very worrying. We have not thoroughly evaluated each case, but we have heard of many situations.

Human Rights defenders, journalists, judges, prosecutors, who have been suspended due to pretrial proceedings or who are facing charges or complaints. There are also people who have had to leave Guatemala, fearing that they will be subjected to some type of criminalization because they do not have faith that their rights will be respected in these processes.

Is the process once morest Virginia Laparra that of a democratic country?

This would not happen in a State that has an independent and impartial judiciary, which guarantees the human rights of those who carry out, day by day, this work for justice.

After Amnesty International’s visit to Guatemala, what is the next step?

Amnesty International will continue to advocate in the case of Virginia Laparra outside of Guatemala, for the right to defend human rights, for judicial independence in spaces for reporting and monitoring. We will also closely monitor Virginia Laparra’s state of health and will make calls to the authorities reminding them of her obligations in terms of human rights.

In July, at the Human Rights Council session, the universal periodic review of Guatemala will be adopted. At the end of January the authorities went to Guatemala and there he was examined within the framework of the United Nations.

They reject measures

Since Virginia Laparra was arrested, her legal team has unsuccessfully requested an alternative measure of house arrest six times, arguing serious health problems.

The detainee suffers from vaginal bleeding “that if it is not treated in time, it can get complicated,” explained Claudia González, a defense lawyer who pointed out that it was thanks to an opinion from the National Institute of Forensic Sciences (Inacif), that she was authorized a review in a public hospital.

“Virginia has been on lab tests and blood tests. In the San Juan de Dios they asked him as a requirement to have two blood donors, that’s why the requirements have been being met. What we are waiting for is for a doctor to determine when the intervention will take place,” said the lawyer.

In December, Laparra suffered from anemia due to considerable blood loss, his lawyer explained, but he also has pressure-related conditions. González affirms that the state of health of her client is delicate and she does not see arguments to deny her the measure.

“We consider that it is an intentional cruelty on the part of the justice system; both the opposing MP, the same rapporteur once morest Torture, who is a joint plaintiff, has disregarded Virginia’s health, and the judges without serious arguments say that she might escape or that she might hinder ”, he explained.

“How is it possible that there are other defendants who are given a measure or who use a sling and are allowed to go to their trusted doctor, but Virginia is denied every request that her defense makes just to guarantee her life. The system is not working equally, there is discrimination once morest Virginia, and we detected torture because she is suffering from a series of medical issues,” the lawyer concluded.

When the Human Rights Ombudsman (PDH) was consulted in this regard, the agency’s social communication team explained that Laparra’s defense lawyers have been attended to, and that they have followed up on the requests made.

“The actions carried out by the Defenders of the Human Rights Ombudsman seek to ensure that health care is not denied or denied; However, whoever decides on the attention to the former prosecutor Virginia Laparra, is the court in charge of the process,” said the PDH.