This article was added by the user . TheWorldNews is not responsible for the content of the platform.

Guatemala snubs human rights court, orders release of prisoners convicted of crimes against humanity

GUATEMALA CITY (AP) — A Guatemalan appeals court on Friday disobeyed a ruling from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by ordering the release of three former high-ranking military officers convicted of crimes against humanity.

In March, the regional human rights court halted the release of the prisoners “to prevent irreparable damage to the right of access to justice for the victims.”

It’s not the first time that Guatemala authorities have disregarded rulings by the court – they’ve been condemned for it 14 times before. The original 2018 sentencing of the men actually came about as a result of a 2004 condemnation by the rights court, which rebuked decades of impunity in a case centered around the forced disappearance and aggravated rape of members of the Molina Theissen family.

National Post

But it’s the first case Guatemala authorities have done so in a situation that involves releasing prisoners already convicted of serious crimes. It also comes as watchdogs warn of deteriorating democracy and a growing embrace of authoritarian tendencies in Central America. In Guatemala, critics have gone as far as accusing elites of trying to “hijack Guatemala’s justice system” for political benefit.

The military officials winning out from the appeals court decision are Francisco Luis Gordillo Martinez, Manuel Antonio Callejas y Callejas and Manuel Benedicto Lucas Garcia.

In 2018, the men were sentenced to between 33 and 58 years in prison for crimes against humanity, the forced disappearance of a 14-year-old boy and the violent rape of his sister.

Despite Friday’s decision, the men still haven’t been released from prison because they still await rulings in two other trials against them for crimes of genocide and forced disappearance.

Still, Jovita Tzul, lawyer for the Molina Thiessen family, rejected the final decision of the appeals court as “a regrettable resolution, which generates serious setbacks in terms of human rights.”