Evening star., 1960-06-23
HERE is OUR ANSWER. -.

venient to revealtheir names. However, the identity
of these witnesses is not secret to anyone. AS it is
we'll known, the trip they made to Washington with
the purpose of giving testimony before the Peace
Committee was the subject of repeated and noisy
publicity that it is quite we'll known that the eX-
officer the Committee refers to is Otilio Mendez
Aquno, deserter from the Dominican Air Force, and
the induStrialiSt and businessman is Guido DAeS-
Sandro, charged with crimes against the security
of the State. Apparently the testimony OF these in
dividualS and that of others equally known for their
notorious hostility against the Government OF the
Dominican Republic, have had such an acceptance
by the Peace Committee that its Report seems per-
meated with the feelings of those confessed enemies
of the Dominican Government in detrlment OF the
value of the positive acts of cooperation OF the Do
mincan Government with the Peace Committee,
performed pursuant to the tradition of clemency to
political prisoners as SubStantiated with authentic
Recommendation presented to the Committee
Interventonist Nature of the Peace Committees
Reports.
The June Report of the Inter-Amercan Peace
Committee is an arbitrary and abusive pronounce
ment which nterferes in the internal affairs of the
Dominican Republic. It is of great significance that
at least three of the five members of the Inter-
American Peace Committee voted against, or alb
stained from approving the key articles OF the Draft
Statute of the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights recently adopted by the Council of
the Organization of American States, believing that
those articles would constitute an improper inter-
ference in the internal affairs of States for they
authorized the Committee to receive petitions from
individuals or groups of persons or associations
alleging that violations of human rights had been
perpetrated in an American country. In effect, the
most outstanding and articulate opponent to the
Draft Statute of the Inter-Amercan Commission on
Human Rights was the United States Representa-
tive, the very same Representative who signed the
Peace Committees Report. The following statement
made by the United States Representative at the
Council of the Organization of American States, on
May II, 1860, is testimony Of this Representatives
views:
"My Government moreover, believes that apart
from strictly juridical considerations, 1t would
be mistake from a political standpoint for the
Council to approve Statute under which the
Commission would be authorized to consider
complaints regarding specific cases OF violations
of human rights. The granting OF such powers
would, in my Governments opinion be likely
to lead to an aggravatiOn and stimulation of
international controversies and tensions"
The Dominican Government would only have
to borrow this statement in order to label the June
Report of the Inter American Peace Committee as
nterventioniSt and abusive to the Dominican Re-
public 1t could be affirmed that pursuant to Reso-
luton w of the Fifth Meeting of Consultation, the
Peace Committee is endowed with powers to inveS-
tigate. Considering, however, the nature of the
investigation of the type contemplated by said
Resolution, and taking into consideration also the
Governments represented in the Peace Committee,
there were then we'll founded reasons to have eX-
pected that the Peace Committee would not 60 to
the extremes it did on its June 9Th Report. The
Peace Committee did not realize, as it should have,
that it dealing in this case with an exceptional
and provisional normative instrument as is Reso-
luton w of the Fifth Meeting of Consultation and
that therefore, restrictive Interpretation OF its
terms was imperative.
Aggravation of international Tensions in the
Caribbean Area.
Judging by the violent tenor of its pronounce
mentS, it would seem that according to the Inter
American Peace Committee, from the standpoint OF
ahealthy and peaceful international coeXiStence life
goes on in the rest of the Caribbean if it were
in the best of possible worlds and that the Doni-
can Republic is the only factor of aggravation of the
political tensions which persist in this area. How
ever if fair evaluaton of the situation is made 1t
becomes quite clear that the origin OF what has been
called international political tension in the Carlb-
bean area cannot mainly or exclusively be brought
to bear on the Dominican Republic. The true cause
of the international tensions in the Caribbean area
is the prevalent tendency of some States to con-
Stantly interfere in the internal affairs OF other
States for reasons of political deology These trends
have reached in their growing strengths the bold
est and most disturbing manifestations, and are my
Government believes, the most dangerous factor of
aggravation of the political tensions in the Carib-
bean area.
The movement sponsoring "the adoption of in
ternatonal measures against the present govern
ment of the Dominican Republic" is not the result
as the Peace Committee affrms, of the activities of
Individuals associations and the press. At least,
these elements, which obey the most varied and
sometimes unavowable motives and instgations,