PERSPECTIVE ON EL SALVADOR : Tipping the Scales of Justice : A civil court is ready to try soldiers for the 1989 Jesuit massacre; the U.S. must stop shielding key witnesses.

An appeals court in El Salvador has upheld a lower court’s decision to try nine members of the Salvadoran armed forces for the murders of six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her daughter in 1989. The ruling removed whatever obstacles remained for the trial of the triggermen, three junior officers, and--for the first time in Salvadoran history--a colonel, who allegedly directed the Jesuits’ assassination. In so doing, the court has paved the way for what could be a watershed event in Salvadoran justice--indeed, for Salvadoran society. In unprecedented fashion, military officers have been investigated by civilians, will stand trial before a civilian magistrate and be judged by a civilian jury. All this is a remarkable accomplishment in a country that for more than a decade has been locked in a bitter civil war that has produced thousands of murder victims but virtually no convicted murderers.

Col. Guillermo Benavides is the highest-ranking officer ever detained in connection with a human-rights crime, and his conviction would strike an important blow against the military’s historical impunity.

Despite this milestone, much remains to be known about what happened on the night of Nov. 15-16, 1989. Specifically, the judicial investigation has not established who gave the order and when, and no one is seriously investigating the crime. Unless there is serious, sustained pressure on El Salvador’s civilian and military officials, this case is apt to join other politically high-profile unsolved murders, such as those of Archbishop Oscar Romero and the four churchwomen and two labor advisers from the United States. In each of these cases, U.S. officials pledged to see that those responsible were held accountable. Yet each time, through a series of contradictory signals, U.S. officials undercut those efforts.

Since the assassination of my Jesuit brothers, Washington has once again sent a series of mixed messages that have contributed to botching the investigation and frittering away an opportunity to stop such heinous crimes. Most recently, Bernard Aronson, the assistant secretary of state for inter-American affairs, hailed as a “breakthrough” a Feb. 22 letter by the Salvadoran high command asking police investigators to question 12 officers about what transpired at two military meetings in the days surrounding the murders. Both the letter and the ensuing reaction were “Made in the U.S.A.,” carefully stage-managed by the State Department for U.S. consumption. All but three of the 12 officers named had already been questioned by the investigating judge or the police. Their testimony then--as in recent interviews--revealed nothing useful. In applauding what amounted to a public-relations gesture, Washington has not furthered the cause of justice.

This incident coincides with a pattern of non-cooperation by U.S. officials, whose behavior contradicts their oft-stated commitment to justice. Shortly after the Jesuits’ assassination, one of our housekeepers, Lucia Barrera de Cerna, told Salvadoran officials that she had seen uniformed soldiers nearby at the time. She was brought to the United States and questioned, and her account was dismissed, with ridicule. A month later, a U.S. Army adviser to the Salvadoran military, Maj. Eric Buckland, told his own superiors, and then the FBI, that Benavides led the men who executed the priests, a housekeeper and her daughter, and that Col. Rene Emilio Ponce (then the army commander, now defense minister) had learned of their plan two weeks before. Five days after the FBI briefed U.S. Embassy officials in San Salvador about Buckland’s statements, he recanted, saying the information was not correct. He has since been labeled “emotionally unstable” and “unreliable.” But his first report was pivotal to Benavides’ arrest, and Buckland’s full account strongly suggests complicity by the high command.

Despite its serious implications for the case, U.S. officials withheld Buckland’s testimony to the FBI from Salvadoran authorities, suggesting on several occasions that the Salvadorans were not capable of adequately evaluating the evidence. To date, the investigating judge has not received all of the evidence surrounding the Buckland incident. The full story must be placed on the public record, with all that it reveals about the murderous mentality of some U.S. advisers in El Salvador.

The State Department’s handling of the Buckland testimony is consistent with a policy that seeks to shield U.S. citizens. When Buckland testified before the judge last September, the State Department imposed a series of conditions on his questioning that served to conceal the bulk of his story. During their court testimony, various witnesses mentioned the names of nine U.S. citizens; of these, only Buckland has been questioned by Salvadoran authorities. Thirteen Green Berets were training those charged with the murders up until 48 hours before the crime. Calls that these trainers be questioned about what they saw and heard have fallen on deaf ears.

In an attempt to establish the truth, we have filed extensive requests under the Freedom of Information Act with the appropriate U.S. agencies. None has provided anything useful; the National Security Agency sent us 11 newspaper clippings. All substantive material has been withheld on “national security” grounds.

While we welcome the coming trial of the nine defendants, there is a long way to go before the full truth is revealed. That there is institutional responsibility for the murders is not in doubt. The question is how high within the armed forces that responsibility can be traced.

While the Jesuit case provides the military with a chance to cleanse itself, after a 17-month coverup it is clear that, absent further U.S. pressure, the military is not likely to reveal the truth. The Bush Administration has proved itself ineffective at exerting pressure at key moments when pressure on the case is most needed, and has allowed itself to become entangled in the incompetence and constant contradictions of its representatives in the U.S. Embassy in San Salvador.

Resolution of the Jesuits’ case has taken on increased importance in light of hopeful signs that U.N.-mediated peace talks may bring an end to a decade of war in El Salvador. Only by establishing the truth can justice be done, the first step toward reconciliation for El Salvador’s bitterly divided people.