The Serving of Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada – Postscript

The serving of legal papers on former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada was big news this week in Bolivia, featured (with photos included) in much of the Bolivian press. Here are a few after thoughts on the case and what it means, as well as some thoughts about the flurry of comments on the Blog this week.

First, I offer up a reasonable correction. Sanchez de Lozada is not a convicted criminal. He is the subject of a formal Bolivian government prosecution in its introductory phase. On October 14, 2004 the Congress of Bolivia (dominated, it should be pointed out, by Sanchez de Lozada’s own MNR party and the allies that elected him President) authorized the prosecution of the self-exiled President and a large group of former aides. Most of them have fulfilled their legal obligation to provide testimony so that state legal authorities can determine whether a full prosecution is warranted. Sanchez de Lozada has refused to respond to that legal order, requiring him to return and provide testimony.

Second, the legal service in Washington was a legalized process. In the District of Columbia citizens can serve legal papers to the target of a legal action, provided that the appropriate notarizations are filed, as they were in this instance. That said, I have no doubt that Sanchez de Lozada’s lawyers will claim that the papers have to be served by the US government. If that is the case, the events this week demonstrate how easy it is for regular citizens to do the job that Bolivians have waited four months for the US government to do. The real question here is why the US government hasn’t fulfilled its role.

Third, the actions taken by activists on Washington were cleared carefully by lawyers involved in the case here in Bolivia. Those involved in pressing the case felt it would be an extremely important strategy to light a fire under both the Bolivian and US authorities involved.

Fourth, on this Blog one of the organizers of the meeting where Sanchez de Lozada was served complained about the action as an intrusion. No doubt, all this brought some discomfort to those who thought they were attending a civil gathering over wine and cheese with a former head of state. Weigh that discomfort, however against the pain that Anna Colque’s mother feels in her chest every morning, knowing that the Bolivian government assassinated her daughter on a rooftop and that no one, at any level, has had to pay any price for it. The demand for justice has a way of intruding on people’s happy parties sometimes. That, quite frankly, is a good thing.

Sanchez de Lozada’s precise responsibility is appropriately something to be debated and decided in court. However, he clearly has no intention of letting that happen. It is for that reason that Mr. Sanchez de Lozada can safely assume that every public appearance he now makes it likely to end similarly. Any organization wishing to have him as a speaker should be aware that his dark history in Bolivia will follow him in the room wherever he goes. Wine, cheese, and the demand for justice. That is the menu from here on out.

Let us not forget. Sanchez de Lozada’s actions in October 2003 where not really the stuff of, “well, maybe he went to far, or maybe no.” His own handpicked Vice President, Carlos Mesa, broke with him over the killings that took place here. If you have some problem understanding the significance of that, ponder this question.

How far would George Bush have to go down the road of repression before Dick Cheney made a public statement declaring that the President had gone to far?

On Todos Santos the dead of October and February 2003 came back and tapped Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada on the shoulder and told him, “Oye, Presidednte, todavia aqui estamos.” Whether and whenever he returns to Bolivia to face the charges of which he is formally accused, those dead will follow him everywhere he goes and most especially to every public appearance he makes in the country that shields him by its official inaction.