On February 23, 2010, Cuban inmate Orlando Zapata Tamayo died after 83 days on hunger strike. He was 42. This is the first such incident since inmate Pedro Luis Boitel died in 1972 under similar conditions. The corporate media put the tragic incident on the front page and emphasized the plight of Cuban prisoners. [1]
Zapata's dramatic exit sparked a justifiable global uproar. The Cuban prisoner's case undeniably fosters sympathy and a sense of solidarity with this person who expressed his despair and malaise in prison carrying out his hunger strike to the ultimate consequence. The heartfelt emotion aroused by his case is quite respectable. In contrast, the manipulation of Tamayo's death and of the grief of his family and friends by the corporate media for political purposes violates the basic principles of journalistic ethics.
Zapata, political prisoner or common convict?
Since 2004, Amnesty International (AI) has considered him among Cuba's 55 "prisoner of conscience." In addition, it has noted that Zapata's hunger strike was launched not only to protest his conditions of detention, but also to demand the impossible: a television, a personal kitchen and a cell phone to call his family. [2] Although not the Devil incarnate, Zapata was not a model prisoner. According to Cuban authorities, he was guilty of several acts of violence during his incarceration, especially against the guards, leading to his conviction being increased from 25 years to 36. [3]
Curiously, AI has never mentioned the alleged political activities that landed Zapata in prison. The reason is relatively simple: Zapata never carried out any anti-government activities prior to incarceration. Instead, the organization recognizes that he was convicted in May 2004 and sentenced to three years imprisonment for "contempt, public disorder and resistance." [4] This sentence is relatively minor compared to the sentences, ranging up to 28 years, that were handed down to the 75 opposition figures convicted in March 2003 of "having received funds or materials from the U.S. government to carry out activities that the authorities consider subversive and damaging to Cuba," as recognized by AI, which is a serious crime in Cuba and any country in the world. Here, AI cannot escape an obvious contradiction: on the one hand these people qualify as "prisoners of conscience" and on the other it admits they committed the serious crime of accepting "money or materials from the U.S. government."
Unlike the 75, the Cuban government has never accused Zapata of accepting funds from a foreign power and has always considered him a common convict. Zapata had a serious criminal record. Since June 1990, he had been arrested and convicted several times for "disturbing the peace, two counts of fraud, public exhibitionism, injury and possession of non-firearm weapons". In 2000, he fractured the skull of Leonardo Simon using a machete. His criminal record does not involve any political actions. It was only after his imprisonment that his mother, Reyna Luisa Tamayo, approached government opposition groups, but she has never been bothered by the authorities. [6]
Double Standards?
The United States and the European Union declared their consternation and demanded the "release of political prisoners." "We are deeply distressed by his death," said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who denounced the oppression of political prisoners in Cuba. Brussels followed suit and demanded the "unconditional release of all political prisoners." France's Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero announced that "following his situation closely, we called for his release along with the other detainees whose health seemed particularly worrying." [7]
Cuban President Raúl Castro "regretted" the death and responded to the uproar from Washington and Brussels by stating "in half a century, we have not murdered anyone here, no one has been tortured, and there have been no extrajudicial executions. Well, here in Cuba there have been people tortured, but at the Guantanamo Naval Base," in reference to the torture center under U.S. administration. "They say they want to hold talks with us and we are ready to discuss with the U.S. government all issues they want. I repeated it three times in Parliament, all, all, all. We will not accept discussions unless both parties enjoy absolute equality. They can investigate or ask any questions in Cuba, but we have the right to ask about all the problems of the United States " [8]
During a visit to Cuba, Brazilian President Lula da Silva also declared his sympathy, but wished to highlight the double standards of the corporate media of Washington and Brussels recalling a sad reality, "I know about virtually all the hunger strikes that have taken place over the past 25 years in the world and many people have died on hunger strikes in many countries." [9] The media ignored the vast majority of those tragic cases and absolutely none received the media coverage that has been afforded this Cuban inmate.
By comparison, in France between January 1, 2010 and February 24, 2010, there were 22 suicides in prison, including a 16-year-old boy. In 2009 there were 122 suicides in French prisons and 115 in 2008. State Secretary of Justice Jean-Marie Bockel declared his impotence in these situations: "When someone decides to commit suicide and is determined to do, whether they are free or in prison... there is nothing you can do about it." The families of those victims were not entitled to the same media treatment as Zapata, nor even an official public statement from the French government. [10]
We must put the Zapata's case into perspective by looking at two much more serious situations deliberately ignored by the corporate media that clearly illustrate the politicization and manipulation of this ordinary incident that would pass unnoticed in most countries, except Cuba.
Since the coup in Honduras took place and the military dictatorship was established on June 27, 2009, led first by Roberto Micheletti and then since January 28, 2010 by Porfirio Lobo, there have been more than a hundred murders and countless cases of disappearances, torture and violence. The abuses occur daily, but are carefully omitted by the corporate media. Thus, when Claudia Larissa Brizuela, a member of a group opposed to the coup, the National Popular Resistance Front (FNRP), was murdered on February 24, 2010, just one day after the death of Zapata, there was not a single word about it in the corporate press. (11)
A similar case further illustrates the duplicity of the corporate media. In December 2009 in La Macarena, Colombia the largest mass grave in the history of Latin America was discovered with no fewer than 2,000 bodies. According to testimonies collected by British MEPs on the ground in La Macarena, these were the bodies of union and peasant leaders killed by the paramilitaries and the Colombian army's Special Forces. Jairo Ramirez, lawyer and secretary of the Standing Committee for the Defense of Human Rights in Colombia, described the grisly scene: "What we saw was frightening. Countless corpses and hundreds of white wooden plaques inscribed with NN and with dates ranging from 2005 to the present. The army commander told us they were the bodies of guerrillas killed in combat, but the people of the region told us of the many community leaders, farmers and community advocates who have disappeared without a trace." Despite the many testimonies and the presence of the MEPs, despite a visit by a Spanish parliamentary delegation to investigate, no corporate media has given even a little attention to this news. (12)
The suicide of Orlando Zapata Tamayo is a tragedy and his mother's pain must be respected. But there are unscrupulous people. The corporate media, Washington and the European Union cares little about his death, just as they care little for the Hondurans and Colombians killed every day. Zapata is useful to them only in the media war against the Cuban government. When ideology is placed above objective information, truth and ethics are the first victims.
Notes
1 Juan O. Tamayo, «Muere el preso político cubano Orlando Zapata», El Nuevo Herald, February 24, 2010.
2 Amnesty International, «Death of Cuban Prisonner of Conscience on Hunger Strike Must Herald Change», February 24, 2010. http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/death-cuban-prisoner-conscience-hunger-strike-must-herald-change-2010-02-24 (Website consulted on February 28, 2010).
3 Enrique Ubieta, «Orlando Zapata, ¿un muerto útil?», Cubadebate, February 24, 2010.
4 Amnesty International, «Death of Cuban Prisonner of Conscience on Hunger Strike Must Herald Change», op. cit.
5 Amnesty International, «Cuba. Cinq années de trop, le nouveau gouvernement doit libérer les dissidents emprisonnés», March 18, 2008. http://www.amnesty.org/fr/for-media/press-releases/cuba-cinq-ann%C3%A9es-de-trop-le-nouveau-gouvernement-doit-lib%C3%A9rer-les-dissid (Website consulted on April 23, 2008).
6 Andrea Rodriguez, «Prensa oficial reacciona a muerte de opositor», The Associated Press, February 27, 2010.
7 El Nuevo Herald, «Rechazo mundial al régimen castrista», February 25, 2010.
8 Raúl Castro Ruz, «Declaraciones del Presidente de los Consejos de Estado y de Ministros Raúl Castro Ruz sobre el fallecimiento del recluso Orlando Zapata Tamayo», February 24, 2010.
9 The Associated Press, « Washington Post cuestiona política de concesiones a Cuba », February 26, 2010.
10 Charlotte Menegaux, «Les limites du 'kit anti-suicide' en prison», Le Figaro, February 25, 2010.
11 Maurice Lemoine, «Selon que vous serez Cubain ou Colombien...», Le Monde Diplomatique, February 26, 2010.
12 Antonio Albiñana, «Aparece en Colombia una fosa común con 2.000 cadáveres», Público.es, February 26, 2010.
Doctor in Iberian and Latin American Studies from the University of Paris-Sorbonne-Paris IV, Salim Lamrani is a lecturer at the University of Paris-Sorbonne-Paris IV and University of Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, as well as a French journalist, specializing in relations between Cuba and the United States. He has just published Cuba: Ce que les médias ne vous diront jamais.
Truth that Salim ignores just to repeat castrofascism lies.
Boitel and Zapata are not the only cases of this kind. The complete list is in one post below.
- Pedro Luis Boitel, tortured while agonizing after 53 days of hunger strike.
- Roberto Lopez Chavez, after 64 days of hunger strike was beaten and left in a punishment cell without water. The day before his death he lay on the cell floor agonizing and asking for water. The prison guards came in the cell and urinated into his mouth. He died next day.
- Orlando Zapata Tamayo, after 64 days of hunger strike he was private of drinking water what caused renal failure. He was moved to the prison nurse room where he was left naked with a strong AC working day and night what cause pneumonia. He was moved to a hospital hours before his death 82 days after he started the hunger strike.
When people escaped soviets gulags and China’s prisons or Cambodia’s concentration camps started to tell horrific histories like these ones no one believe them. Today happens the same with Cubans and North Korans political prisoners. You are free to believe or not but the evidences are there, the records are there, the witnesses, the survivors, former political prisoners that spent 25-30-35 years in prison and can tell hundred of histories like these.
To hear and present only the version of a criminal proven regime is if not an act of complicity an extreme suspicious procedure.
“Zapata's hunger strike was launched not only to protest his conditions of detention, but also to demand the impossible: a television, a personal kitchen and a cell phone to call his family.” – Salim wrote.
But the truth is that on either December 2 or 3, 2009, Zapata began a hunger strike as a protest against the Cuban government for having denied him the choice of wearing white dissident clothes instead of the designated prisoner uniform, as well as denouncing the living conditions of other prisoners. As part of his claim, Zapata was asking for conditions comparable to those that Fidel Castro had while incarcerated after his 1953 attack against the Moncada Barracks For their part, the Cuban government stated he refused food because authorities wouldn't put a TV set, a stove and a phone in his cell.
Salim prefers regime’s version.
It is well known that Cubans political prisoners uses to protest, revolt, strike and prefers to be naked for years or buried for years in coffin like cells instead to wear common prisoners cloths and obey common prisoners discipline code as protes for regime’s policy of not recognizing the existence of political prisoners. This attitude is known as to be planted (Plantados)….. if Salim wants to illustrate himself about the fight of those prisoners inside the jail for decades I recommend him to contact the organization “Planted until Freedom”, them can tell him many histories similar to Tamayo’s.
Roberto López Chávez, 25 years old, died 12/11/1966 in Isla de Pinos prison.
Luis Álvarez Ríos, 31 years old, died el 8/9/1967 in Castillo del Príncipe prison.
Francisco Aguirre Vidarrueta, died 9/9/1967 in Castillo del Príncipe prison.
Carmelo Cuadra Hernández, died 7/29/1969 in some of Havana’s prisons.
Pedro Luis Boitel, 34 years old, died 5/25/1972 in Castillo del Príncipe prison.
Olegario Charlot Spileta, died 1/15/1973 in Boniato prison.
Enrique García Cuevas, died 5/23/1973 in Pretensado prison.
Reinaldo Cordero Izquierdo, died 5/21/1975 in Pinar del Río prison.
José Barrios Pedré, died 9/22/1977 in Pretensado prison.
Santiago Roche Valle, 45 years old, died 9/8/1985 in Kilo 7 prison.
Nicolás González Regueiro, 42 years old, died 9/16/1992 in Manacas prison.
“Reyna Luisa Tamayo (Zapata’s mother), approached government opposition groups, but she has never been bothered by the authorities.”
This is simply a lie. Reina Luisa never was able to make an autopsy to his son’s body. She was lucky because no other mother of political prisoners died by fire squad, assassination, torture and hunger strike was able to see his son or daughter body. The reason is simply, regime tries in such way to hide the cause of the death. She was lucky because the same reason Salim protest: the international clamor. Here we have Salim asking the international press to help the criminal regime of castros to hide the evidences of the crimes they commit.
That Zapata died of thirst and not of hunger is evidently the reason because regime rejected the offering of Reina Luisa Tamayo about leaving the country, after regime’s proposed to her, with the only condition of getting with her the body of her son. Political police answer was no….. Why Salim????
After Zapata’s funeral Reina Luisa has been violently hindered by political police and paramilitary organizations of visiting the cemetery and the church in the little town where she lives. This has been filmed several times because this violation of Reina Luisa rights occurs every single Sunday:
http://www.directorio.org/pressreleases/note.php?note_id=2801
Evidently Salim is too misinformed as to be a “journalist” or too partial as to be credible.