+   *    +     +     
About Us 
The Issues 
Our Research Products 
Order Publications 
Multimedia 
Press Room 
Resources for Monitor Researchers 
ARCHIVES HOME PAGE 
    >
 
Table of Contents
Country Reports
PERU, Landmine Monitor Report 2000
LM Report 2000 Full Report   Executive Summary   Key Findings   Key Developments   Translated Country Reports

PERU

Key developments since March 1999: In April 1999, the “Program for Demining Assistance in Ecuador/Perú” (PADEP) was established by the OAS. In August and September 1999, UNMAS and the OAS conducted independent assessments of the mine problem in Peru. An inter-ministerial Working Group on Antipersonnel Mines was formalized in September 1999 to oversee implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty. Perú has served as co-rapporteur of the Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee of Experts on Mine Clearance. Stockpile destruction is underway. More than 30,000 landmines were cleared and destroyed in 1999 and early 2000.

Mine Ban Policy

Peru signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997. On 19 May 1998, the Law for the National Adoption of the Ottawa Treaty (Legislative Resolution 26951) was approved and on 17 June 1998, Peru became the nineteenth nation to ratify the Mine Ban Treaty.

Peru has not yet enacted implementation legislation, though a Foreign Ministry official told Landmine Monitor that such legislation should be submitted following the elections of April and May 2000.[1] Peru has reported nearly a dozen different implementation measures already taken, such as directives to the Armed Forces and Police informing them of their obligations of the treaty, creation of a national committee in 1999 to assist disabled people, the agreement between Ecuador and Peru to clear their common border of mines and the creation of special units of engineers for demining.[2]

An inter-ministerial Grupo de Trabajo sobre Minas Antipersonales (Working Group on Antipersonnel Mines) was formalized by Legislative Resolution 430-99-RREE on 17 September 1999,[3] though it has been active since December 1998. The Working Group is led by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense and also includes the Ministries of Energy and Mines, Interior, Health, and Education.[4] The Working Group is responsible for overseeing implementation of the Mine Ban Treaty, including preparing the national implementation law.[5]

A Peruvian delegation participated in the First Meeting of States Parties in Maputo in May 1999. In his statement at the meeting, Ambassador Jorge Valdéz Carrillo, Perú’s Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, said that the Working Group was formed to:

evaluate and recommend political, legal and administrative measures that need to be taken in [national] territory. Some of the group’s recommendations have already been approved – including that the Armed Forces and Police convert production installations; clear, register and destroy mines used to protect infrastructure from potential terrorist attack; train personnel in [these tasks], and facilitate the rehabilitation of victims.[6]

Since the Maputo meeting, Peru has served as co-rapporteur along with The Netherlands of the newly created Standing Committee of Experts on Mine Clearance. Peru has participated in all the intersessional meetings of the treaty in Geneva. Peru has also actively supported regional initiatives to ban AP mines and promote the Mine Ban Treaty.

Peru voted in favor of the December 1999 UN General Assembly Resolution 54/54B supporting the Mine Ban Treaty, as it had for similar resolutions in 1997 and 1998. At the 54th General Assembly, Francisco Tudela, Permanent Representative of Peru at the United Nations said, “We believe that it is highly important to continue to work so as to achieve the implementation of the goals and provisions within the [Convention].”[7]

Peru submitted its Article 7 transparency report in Spanish to the UN on 2 May 2000, more than eight months after its due date. A Foreign Ministry official said the report was late because information was “dispersed throughout the country,” often “out of date” and sometimes sensitive requiring declassification by the government.[8]

Peru ratified Amended Protocol II (Landmines) of the Convention of Conventional Weapons on 3 July 1997. Peru has submitted its transparency report under Article 13 of Amended Protocol II, and participated in the December 1999 First Annual Conference of States Parties to the amended protocol. Peru is a member of the Conference on Disarmament, but has not been a noted supporter or opponent of efforts to launch negotiations on a mine export ban in that forum.

Production

Peru states that its production of antipersonnel mines ceased in 1997, and that the process of converting the production facilities began in March 1999.[9] A UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) Assessment Mission to Peru reported that production of landmines in the country only ceased entirely in January 1999, according to officials at the Ministry of Defense.[10]

Peru states that the Centros de Fabricación de Armas of the War Navy was the only state institution producing in the past.[11] Some were produced on request from public utility companies during the internal armed conflict of the 1980s and into the mid-1990s.[12] According to Peru’s Article 7 report, the War Navy produced two pressure-activated antipersonnel mines: the CICITEC and the MGP-30.[13]

According to a March 2000 report by the Defensoría del Pueblo (Office of the Ombusdman of Peru), the utility company EDEGEL S.A. states that the War Navy also manufactured shoebox-sized, pressure-activated DEXA landmines for use on EDEGEL property. Later this mine was replaced by the MG MAP 304.[14]

Transfer

General Raúl O’Connor, Director of the Information Office in the Ministry of Defense, told Landmine Monitor that Peru has never exported mines.[15] It appears to have imported mines from several countries, including Belgium, Spain, the United States, and Yugoslavia. (See below).

Stockpiling and Destruction

Landmine Monitor Report 1999 indicated that Peru reported to the OAS in 1997 that it had no stockpile of antipersonnel mines.[16] However, Peru’s Article 7 report submitted 2 May 2000 states that the country has a stockpile of 334,756 antipersonnel mines.[17] The composition of Peru’s stockpile according to the Article 7 report is as follows: 16,564 PMB-6 mines;[18] 24,861 PMB-6N mines; 5 EXPAL mines with fuse; 27 P4 A-1 EXPAL mines; 30,000 EXPAL mines without fuse; 376 M-5 mines with fuse; 68 M-35 C/ESP BS-BG mines; 25,307 M-35 C/ESP M-5 mines; 11,587 M-409 mines; 68,212 PMA-3 mines; 49,712 POMZ-2M mines; 89,506 MGP A/R (CICITEC) mines; 328 CICITEC mines without cap or fuse; 108 M-16 mines; 150 MGP-30 mines; 9,957 60510 MN mines; 328 Multi-use Magnetic mines; and 7,660 M18A1 Claymore mines. These mines are in the possession of the War Navy, National Army and National Police of Peru.

Peru reports that the War Navy destroyed 3,916 stockpiled CICITEC AP mines in 1999.[19]

In April 2000 a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official told Landmine Monitor that a full stockpile destruction process was in preparation in the country, subject to international technical assistance and funding.[20] Peru reports that the government plans to destroy 30% of its stockpile in 2000, 30% in 2001 and 40% in 2002 using controlled detonation and incineration as methods of destruction.[21]

Peru plan to retain 9,526 AP mines for training, including 1,000 PMB-6, 1,833 A/R MGP CICITEC, 1,050 M-409, 1,100 PMA-3, 1,100 PMB-6N, 1,000 POMZ-2M, 108 M-16; 150 MGP 30, 985 AP60510, and 1,200 M18A1.[22]

Use

Peru has repeatedly stated that its Armed Forces did not use antipersonnel mines during its border conflict with Ecuador.[23] The Latin American Association for Human Rights (ALDHU), however, estimated that both Ecuador and Peru laid 130,000 to 150,000 AP mines during the conflict.[24] At the January 1999 Mexico City Regional Seminar on Landmines, representatives from both governments said that implementation of the peace agreement, including mine clearance, was more important than trying to establish who placed the mines.[25]

Peru acknowledges using AP mines inside the country as part of its counter-insurgency campaign during the 1980s and early 1990s against the guerrilla groups Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru (Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement). According to a December 1999 UNMAS Assessment Mission Report, the Peruvian government authorized the laying of AP mines by its armed forces around high-tension electrical towers and other installations in 1989 and 1990, at the height of the internal armed conflict.[26] The Peruvian government acknowledges laying 87,146 AP mines in the country. A total of 15,437 AP mines were used around public infrastructure installations in the Departments of Puno and Cajamarca in the Andean highlands, as well as in Lima, including the Puente de Piedra Bridge and the nearby Port of El Callao.[27] A total of 71,709 CICITEC AP mines were used in the perimeter of high-tension electrical towers to protect against guerrilla sabotage attempts, including 9,149 mines around 178 EDEGEL S.A. towers and 62,560 AP mines around 1,842 ETECEN towers.[28] UNMAS reports mines were also used around the remote maximum-security prison at Yanamayo in the Andean highlands of Puno Department.[29]

Landmine Problem

Peru’s landmine problem affects three parts of the country. One is along the northern border with Ecuador, due to a long-standing conflict between the two countries. A second is Peru’s southern border with Chile, where the Chilean military used antipersonnel landmines in the 1970s and 1980s due to tension between the countries. The third area is around public infrastructure, especially electrical installations, inside the country from attacks during Peru’s internal armed conflict in the 1980s and 1990s.

The border between Peru and Ecuador is mine-affected as a consequence of the 1995 border conflict, with the majority of AP landmines laid along a 78 kilometer-long contested area in the foothills of the Cordillera del Cóndor mountain range.[30] The Peruvian government estimates there are approximately 120,000 AP mines along the border with Ecuador: in the Río Santiago, Río Cenepa and Comainas sectors; along the north-east frontier zone; and in the Departments of Tumbes and Piura.[31] Peru does not have maps of mined areas along the border.[32] According to an article in the official government gazzette, Ambassador Carlos Pareja Ríos said, “Drafts of maps are not useful, because of the features of the land. Because of heavy rains, it’s almost certain that the mines have been displaced to other areas.... Thus, we are identifying the exact location of these explosive artifacts.”[33] The most frequently encountered mines are the T-AB-1, PRB M409, P-4-B and PMD-6M.[34] It is also reported in the military trade press that the Chinese Type 72, Italian VS-50, and Belgian M35 and M409 AP mines are also found in Peru.[35]

Some 184,000 people live in the border areas with Ecuador that are mine-affected.[36] The dense jungle areas of the Peruvian-Ecuador border in Amazonas Department are home to the Shuar and Achuar indigenous peoples on both sides of the border, and the Aguaruna and Huambisa on Peruvian territory. These people were displaced by the border conflict and their ability to return to a traditional way of life is constrained by the landmine and UXO problem, according to UNMAS.[37] UNMAS reports that most AP mines are in the area between the rivers Cenepa and Coangos (hence the so-called “Cenepa Conflict” of 1995) in the Department of Amazonas. The region between Cuzumaza and Bumbuiza in the Department of Loreto and the regions of Lagartococha and Güepi were previously mine-affected, but these are reported to be mine-free now. According to the Peruvian government, these regions were cleared of AP mines in order to facilitate border demarcation along the Departments of Tumbes and Piura.[38]

In the south of the country, Peru’s border with Chile in the department of Tacna is also mine-affected. Only Chile is reported to have used AP mines along that border, during the 1970s and 1980s. According to the Ministry of Defense, the mine-affected lands in Tacna are productive agricultural lands and the mined areas under the jurisdiction of the Peruvian government are properly marked.[39]

The third mine-affected area is inside the country, mainly around electrical installations. According to the Defensoría del Pueblo (Office of the Ombudsman of Peru) report of March 2000, the Peruvian Ministry of Energy and Mines reported that three electrical energy companies in the country had mine-affected installations: EDEGEL S.A. has 176 mined electrical towers, each with an average of 40 to 50 AP mines in its perimeter; ETECEN S.A. has 165 mined electrical towers, each with an average of 40 AP mines in its perimeter; and ETEVENSA S.A. has a thermal-power generation station ringed with landmines.[40] According to UNMAS, the National Police reportedly have records of the minefields but these are “sketchy and of questionable accuracy”; UNMAS notes heavy rainfall causes mine displacements and washes away protective fences and warning signs.[41]

Surveys and Assessments

In addition to a number of internal assessments, there have been two recent evaluations of the mine problem in Peru. A mission was conducted by the Organization of American States (OAS) from 16-20 August 1999 in order to evaluate the AP mine situation along the border. As a result of this mission, the OAS submitted working documents for consideration by both governments containing a proposal to provide coordinated international assistance in integrated action against AP mines in their respective territories.[42] In August-September 1999, UNMAS conducted a multi-disciplinary and inter-agency assessment mission to both Ecuador and Peru.[43]

Mine Action Funding

Following ratification of the Mine Ban Treaty in June 1998, Peru has benefited from access to international funding for demining, specifically along its border with Ecuador.[44] International contributions received to date do not deal with Peru’s internal landmine problem. Peru has appealed for technical and financial assistance for its medium and long-term clearance.[45]

As part of the peace agreement of 26 October 1998, Peru and Ecuador agreed to demining of the border under the supervision of the Ecuador/Peru Multinational Observation Mission, MOMEP. MOMEP is made up of military representatives from the United States, Brazil, Argentina and Chile. Canada, Japan, the United States, Spain, OAS and UNDP have contributed funds to support mine clearance for demarcation of the Ecuador-Peru border.[46] Peru was formally included in the U.S. humanitarian demining program on 22 February 1999 and will receive approximately $3.225 million in assistance in 1999 and 2000.

In April 1999, the OAS set up the “Program for Demining Assistance in Ecuador/Perú” (PADEP), with a Canadian government contribution of CAN$300,000 (U.S.$198,000).[47] According to the OAS, the PADEP contribution, divided equally between the two countries, has been used exclusively for the purchase of equipment and materials for activities to support humanitarian demining associated with the demarcation of the border.[48]

Currently, the Engineers School of Lima counts with a program of training in humanitarian demining supported by Spain and the United States.

Internationally, Peru has been co-rapporteur of the Mine Ban Treaty Standing Committee of Experts on Mine Clearance since May 1999 and will co-chair this committee beginning in September 2000. Peru has taken a keen interest in areas including: the current review of demining standards; the criteria used to decide the assignment of international co-operation; links between mine removal and the consolidation of peace and of mutual trust between neighboring countries; participation by Armed Forces in demining operations and in the need for primacy of national decisions in the planning and management of action programs against mines.[49]

Mine Clearance

The inter-ministerial Working Group on Antipersonnel Mines is the coordination focal point for mine action efforts in Peru. It has prepared a national action plan that addresses all aspects of the mine problem, which is currently under consideration, according to the Article 7 report.

In May 2000, Peru reported that the Army and War Navy had cleared and destroyed a total of 32,373 AP mines.[50]

Demining of the Peru-Ecuador border is the responsibility of Peruvian Army Engineers who have a current mine clearance capacity of 140 men separated into ten teams of fourteen. The UNMAS Assessment Report describes in detail the mine clearance procedures, equipment and logistics in the border’s tropical jungle in which it is very difficult to operate.[51] The first phase involved clearance to permit placement of border markers. This was done in collaboration with the Ecuadorian military at the beginning of 1999. The operation took ninety days to complete and cost over U.S.$3.5 million.[52] A total of 439 TAB1, M-409 and M18A1 mines were cleared and destroyed.[53]

The second phase is clearance of a road linking Ecuador to the Tiwinza Memorial, which is on the Peruvian side of the border. Ecuador is responsible for demining around the memorial and Peru is responsible for the access road. In May 2000, Peru reported that it had cleared and destroyed nine hundred sixty-three TAB1, M-409 and M18A1 mines while demining the road.[54] The next priorities are the provinces of Piura and Tumbes, the Cordillera del Cóndor in Amazonas province, and then Loreto province, taking eight years at an estimated cost of U.S.$35 million.[55]

Responsibility for clearance of mines around the electrical energy companies appears to rest with the companies, but the executing agent is the Ministry of the Interior, specifically the National Police. The National Police has a specialized unit, the Division de Seguridad de Activacion de Minas y Dispositivos Explosivos de Autoproteccion (DIVSAM-DEXA) dedicated to dealing with mines and improvised explosive devices, which receives funding and taskings from the electrical companies. DIVSAM-DEXA has an 84-man unit that can field ten 8-man mine clearance teams, but UNMAS reports that they are poorly equipped, with sub-standard and insufficient protection equipment.[56]

In May 2000, Peru reported that it had cleared 6,084 MGP mines and 6,181 CICITEC and DEXA mines on the perimeter of high-tension electrical towers, as well as 18,706 MGP mines around public infrastructure in Ventanilla, Lima.[57]

In February 1999, the National Penitentiary Institute of the Ministry of Justice reported that the high-security prison of Yanamayo, Puno Department, had been cleared of mines.[58]

Ratification of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty by Chile, currently a signatory, is expected to lead to a mine clearance plan for this border area, including the department of Tacna.

Mine Awareness

According to a Ministry of Foreign Affairs official there are no mine awareness programs in the mine-affected areas, but “the population at risk does seem to know about the problem as well as the implied danger.”[59] The UNMAS Assessment Mission reported that the local population in the border area “seems to be generally aware of the landmine threat.”[60] UNMAS noted that the military had expressed an interest in initiating a mine awareness education campaign and noted that the local indigenous communities could implement effective community mine awareness programs if they are provided with some technical assistance.[61]

UNMAS also reported that the National Police and electrical companies have implemented some information and prevention programs in settlements close to mined towers and other such infrastructure facilities, including dissemination of illustrated pamphlets, but recommended that the existing programs need be reassessed in light of recent casualties.[62]

Landmine Casualties

There are no official surveys that report on the number of victims of AP mines in Peru.[63] According to the Director of the Information Office of the Ministry Defense, there are thought to be approximately 130 AP mine victims in the country, the majority of them from the Cordillear del Cóndor border region.[64] The ICRC reported thirty-seven mine accidents on the Peru-Ecuador border from 1994 to 1999, including thirty-six military personnel and one civilian.[65]

According to the UNMAS, seventy-two mine accidents have been reported around electrical installations since they were mined in the late 1980s and early 1990s, including thirty-two accidents to national police, five to electrical company employees, seven to other maintenance staff and twenty-eight to the local civilian population.[66]

Along the Chilean border, the ICRC reported accidents including one civilian mine accident in 1994 and one in 1998.[67] The human rights NGO APRODEH also reported an accident that occurred in August 1999 where one civilian was injured and another killed, later confirmed by the military authorities.[68]

According to the Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación, INR (National Rehabilitation Institute), 10% of the 1,218 amputees it has treated are related to accidents with explosive materials and firearms but it does not have specific information on mine victims.[69] The National Institute of Statistics and Information, INEI, does not have reports of victims that died or were injured by mines or explosive artifacts. The Ministry of Health does not provide official statistics on AP mine casualties who have been treated in hospitals and it is not possible to determine how many victims have been assisted.

Victim Assistance

While the Army and National Police guarantee and provide medical assistance, physical rehabilitation and prostheses for their own members injured by mines, in general medical attention that is available for civilians is more limited, costly and does not include provision of ortheses and prostheses.[70] The Armed Forces have programs in place that provide vocational reintegration but the National Police programs only deal with the physical and psychological aspects of victim assistance.[71] For veterans of the Cenepa Conflict of 1995, Law 26511 guarantees their right to physical rehabilitation. Veterans’ benefits were extended by Law 27124 (27 May 1999) to those who were killed or incapacitated in that conflict. The military and National Police have disability pensions for members, though these are inadequate for covering the medical and social costs of becoming disabled in Peru.[72]

Along the border regions, and in the Andean highlands, basic health care and access to clean drinking water and sanitation are restricted. Civilians who are seriously injured must be transferred to Lima for treatment, where the majority of specialized health care services and well-trained professionals are concentrated.

The INR offers programs for amputees and burn victims, including physical and occupational therapy, psychological counseling and social services. According to the Director of the Congreso Nacional de Discapacitados, CONADIS (National Congress of the Disabled), the INR receives about 120 patients each year.[73] CONADIS is the inter-ministerial body dedicated to the protection of disabled persons.[74] CONADIS is in charge of the “Plan for the Development of the Disabled,” which according to an official at the Ministry of Health does not make reference to assistance for employment and socio-economic reintegration of the disabled.[75]

According to an official at the Ministry of Health, Peruvian laws do not make special provisions or provide pensions to civilians disabled by AP mines.[76]

The UNMAS Assessment team received a petition from the Association of Persons Disabled by Explosive Devices (APIDEX) which described the objectives of the association, called for better treatment from the national health service for its disabled members, and appealed to the UN for international technical support and cooperation.[77]

<PARAGUAY | SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS>

[1] According to another official in the Foreign Ministry, “by constitutional disposition, the Ottawa Convention is automatically part of domestic law, regardless of whether being proclaimed by an enacting law,” but officials understand it is necessary to “specify crimes against the Ottawa Convention, and corresponding penalties, by means of enacting a complementary penal code law.” Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Project Planning and Assessment Office, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Peru, 24 April 2000.
[2] Article 7 report, Form A, submitted 2 May 2000.
[3] The Working Group is chaired by Ambassador Carlos Pareja Ríos. See El Peruano (Official Government Gazzette), Lima, 22 September 1999.
[4] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 21.
[5] Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000.
[6] Statement by Ambassador Jorge Váldez Carrillo, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Peru, at the First Meeting of State Parties to the Mine Ban Treaty, Maputo, 3-7 May 1999.
[7] Statement by Ambassador Franciso Tudela, Permanent Representative of Peru to the United Nations, at the 54th General Assembly Plenary on Agenda Item 35 (“Assistance in Mine Action”), 18 November 1999, New York.
[8] Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000.
[9] Article 7 report, Form E, submitted 2 May 2000; and, email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000. The Article 7 report indicates that the Peruvian War Navy’s production facilities for CICITEC antipersonnel landmines at the Naval Base of Callao are currently being converted.
[10] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 21.
[11] Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000; and, Article 7 report, Form E, submitted 2 May 2000.
[12] Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000.
[13] Article 7 Report, Form H, 2 May 2000. The Article 7 report repeatedly refers to CICITEC as an AP mine, but UNMAS has indicated that CICITEC is a manufacturer of mines, particularly the MG-MAP 304. See UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 12.
[14] Defensoría del Pueblo, “El problema de las minas antipersonales dentro del territorio nacional,” Lima, March 2000. UNMAS states that the DEXA mine was designed by the national police and was locally manufactured. The report also states that the replacement MG-MAP 304 mines were produced by CICITEC. See UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 12.
[15] Telephone interview with General Raul O’Connor, Director of the Information Office of the Ministry of Defense, 19 April 2000.
[16] Landmine Monitor Report 1999, p. 278, citing OAS, “Summary Table: Antipersonnel Landmines, as of May 1, 1998.”
[17] Article 7 Report, Form B, 2 May 2000.
[18] The PMB designation is not one found in standard reference materials. From the description, this would appear to be a variation of the Soviet PMD-6 wooden box mine.
[19] Article 7 Report, Form G, 2 May 2000.
[20] Email from Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 24 April 2000. Peru’s representative to the 10 December 1999 meeting of the SCE on Stockpile Destruction said that it needed help with technical aspects of destruction and asked for assistance. He also asked the OAS to certify the destruction process.
[21] Article 7 Report, Form E, 2 May 2000.
[22] Ibid., Form D.
[23] “Perú did not lay such mines before, during, or after the Cenepa Conflict [with Ecuador],” Article 7 Report, Form C, 2 May 2000.
[24] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 11, citing ALDHU report dated August 1999.
[25] Remarks at the Regional Seminar on AP mines, Mexico City, 11-12 January 1999.
[26] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 8.
[27] Article 7 Report, Form C, 2 May 2000.
[28] Ibid.
[29] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 24.
[30] Ibid., p. 10.
[31] Article 7 Report, Form C, 2 May 2000.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Mónica Macedo Latorre, “Perú avanza en el desminado de la frontera norte,” El Peruano (Official Government Gazette), 26 October 1999.
[34] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 11.
[35] Jane’s Mines and Mine Clearance, on-line update, 18 November 1999.
[36] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 13.
[37] Ibid., p. 3, 13.
[38] Ibid., p. 11.
[39] Telephone interview with General Raúl O’Connor, Ministry of Defense, 19 April 2000.
[40] Defensoría del Pueblo, “El problema de las minas antipersonales dentro del territorio nacional,” March 2000.
[41] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999, p. 12.
[42] See Landmine Monitor appendix, Report of the OAS Mine Action Program, 2000.
[43] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Peru,” 3 December 1999.
[44] Mónica Macedo Latorre, “Perú avanza en el desminado de la frontera norte”, El Peruano (Official Government Gazette), 26 October, 1999, Especial VIII.
[45] See Statement by Amb. Franciso Tudela, Permanent Representative of Peru to the UN, 18 November 1999, p. 5.
[46] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 22.
[47] Report of the OAS Mine Action Program, 2000.
[48] Ibid.
[49] Statement by Amb. Franciso Tudela, Permanent Representative of Peru to the UN, 18 November 1999.
[50] Article 7 Report, Form E, 2 May 2000.
[51] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 15.
[52] Ibid., p. 16.
[53] Article 7 Report, Form E, 2 May 2000.
[54] Ibid.
[55] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 16.
[56] Ibid., p. 17.
[57] Article 7 Report, Form E, 2 May 2000.
[58] Instituto Nacional Penitenciaro [National Penitentiary Institute] of the Ministry of Justice, Document 090-99 INPE-VP, 23 February 1999.
[59] Telephone interview with Carmen Azurin Araujo, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Peru, 21 April 2000.
[60] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 18.
[61] Ibid., p. 25-26.
[62] Ibid., p. 26.
[63] Telephone interview with Elizabeth Cornejo, Official of the Ministry of Health of Peru, 16 April 2000.
[64] Telephone interview with General Raul O’Connor, Ministry of Defense, 19 April 2000.
[65] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 13.
[66] Ibid.
[67] Ibid.
[68] Ibid.
[69] Oficio No.926-DG-INR-99, 25 November 1999.
[70] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 19.
[71] Ibid.
[72] Telephone interview with Colonel Walter Ríos, Military Attaché of the Peruvian Embassy in Colombia, 26 March 2000.
[73] Telephone interview with Francisco Velásquez, Director, CONADIS, 20 April 2000.
[74] Ibid.
[75] Telephone interview with Elizabeth Cornejo, Official of the Ministry of Health of Peru, 16 April 2000.
[76] Ibid.
[77] UNMAS, “Mine Action Assessment Mission Report: Perú,” 3 December 1999, p. 19.