Seven years have passed since a
Wells Fargo employee drove off with
$7.2 million in Hartford, Connecticut.
In 1985, the action was attributed to
Los Macheteros, the machete wielders,
a Puerto Rican liberation organization
that since 1976 has claimed credit for a
series of armed attacks against FBI and
U.S. military installations on the is-
land.
Filiberto Ojeda Rfos, 56, is a founder
of Los Macheteros. He is currently
under federal indictment in Hartford,
accused of conspiracy in the Wells
Fargo case. On August 30, 1985, he
and 14 other independentistas were
arrested in an early-morning raid car-
ried out by 225 FBI agents and mem-
bers of the Puerto Rican Ancillary
Police.
Ojeda was kept in preventive deten-
tion for 45 months, the longest pre-trial
jailing for any prisoner in U.S. history.
Now that he is free on bail, the FBI
closely monitors his movements
through an electronic beeper perma-
nently strapped to his ankle. He may
not leave San Juan without permission
from the Hartford judge; he must report
daily to court authorities and is under a
strict curfew.
Los Macheteros says its goal is to
draw international attention to Puerto
Rico’s colonial status and, through
armed action, to pressure the United
States to withdraw from the island.
Ojeda has testified before the United
Nations and the U.S. Congress.
His political activism dates from
the 1950s. From 1961 to 1969 he lived
in Cuba, studying political science at
the University of Havana. There he
joined a Puerto Rican revolutionary or-
ganization, the Movimiento Pro-Inde-
pendencia. A year after his return to
Puerto Rico, he was arrested and ac-
cused of participating in another pro-
independence group, the Movimiento
Independentista Revolutionario en
Armas, though these charges were later
dropped. Now, if convicted, he faces a
sentence of up to 250 years.
U.S. authorities monitor Ojeda’s movements with an electronic shackle
strapped to his ankle
Frank T. Fitzgerald teaches sociol-
ogy at the College of Saint Rose in
Albany, New York, and is the author of
Managing Socialism: From Old Cad-
res to New Professionals in Revolu-
tionary Cuba (Praeger, 1990).
NACLA REPORT ON THE AMERICAS
I
,,
rS iThe Wells Fargo trial is currently
awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on
whether taped conversations of Ojeda
in his home may be introduced as evi-
dence. Ojeda and the eight other inde-
pendentistas charged in the case are
protesting the decision to hold proceed-
ings in Hartford, believing they would
only receive a fair trial in Puerto Rico.
The Wells Fargo trial has been delayed
for two years. When will it begin?
Very important things have been
happening. In July 1988 the federal
district court judge in Hartford sup-
pressed evidence that the FBI obtained
through electronic surveillance, because
the tapes were not immediately sealed
as required by law. The FBI delayed the
sealing for 84 days, time enough to alter
the contents of the tapes in its laborato-
ries in Washington. The violation was
so evident that the presiding judge saw
no alternative but to suppress the tapes.
Prosecutors immediately appealed
the decision before the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals in New York. A panel
of three judges thoroughly reviewed
the case and unanimously confirmed
the opinion of the district court. This
decision was then appealed by the
government to the Supreme Court, and
a hearing was held on February 28,
1990. The Court opted to remand the
case to the Second Circuit and to order
further findings to determine whether
government agents had acted with jus-
tification.
The fact that three senior judges
from the Second Circuit, in addition to
the district court judge, unanimously
agreed that the FBI had violated the
procedures for electronic surveillance
makes the acceptance of the appeal
very suspicious. This demonstrates that
[the Supreme Court’s] intentions are
either to pressure the Second Circuit
into justifying the government’s posi-
tion and permitting the use of the tapes,
or to avoid responsibility for condemn-
ing a clear violation of the law by the
FBI.
This is an important case because of
its political nature. Whatever is decided
by the Supreme Court establishes a
binding precedent in the United States.
If the evidence is suppressed, other
persecuted organizations who are vic-
tims of the same type of violations by
the FBI can appeal on the same grounds.
That is where things are now. We
are waiting for the courts to decide, and
the trial could start by September, in
Hartford.
You were recently found innocent in an
important case in Puerto Rico.
Yes, on August 26, 1989. In 1985 I
was charged with resisting arrest and
assaulting two FBI agents during the
attack on my home. As they admitted
during the trial, they tried to murder me.
It was an extremely important trial. It
was covered every day by the media,
and the Puerto Rican people became
involved. This trial raised many issues,
like language and jury selection. Most
Puerto Ricans do not speak English, but
federal proceedings have to be held in
English. Prospective jurors had to stand
in front of the judge to be quizzed on
their understanding of English. This
was very offensive to people. I under-
took my own defense in Spanish, be-
cause I have the right to speak to the
people in Spanish.
The main issue was that this was a
case of an independentista against the
FBI as an institution. Thejury, made up
of Puerto Rican workers, saw this
clearly. They did not see just me on
trial; they saw themselves and the Puerto
Rican people on trial. They made a
historic decision: They unanimously
acquitted me.
Why did you get involved with Los Ma-
cheteros ?
The FBI has institutionalized re-
pression in our country. It created
“subversive” lists with the names of
more than 150,000 independentistas,
who often find themselves thrown out
of work. FBI agents organized and
trained death squads within the Puerto
Rican police department.
Los Macheteros is a clandestine
organization formed in 1976 that uses
armed struggle to oppose U.S. repres-
sion in Puerto Rico. It is a continuation
of our long struggle for independence.
People who believe in independence
have to protect themselves against re-
pression; clandestinity provides that
type of protection. Of course, clan-
destinity does not mean hiding from the
people, only from the repressive forces.
You have to be immersed in the popu-
lation to be able to progress toward the
goal of independence.
One branch of Los Macheteros does
organizing in communities around
concrete issues. For example, squatters
struggling for housing get our support.
Workers on strike get our support.
Another part of the organization under-
takes military actions, such as attacks
against U.S. military bases in Puerto
Rico.
You refer to repression in Puerto Rico.
What have you personally experienced?
I was first arrested in New York
City, for a day, for demonstrating against
the Playa Gir6n [Bay of Pigs] attack
against Cuba. Then, when I tried to go
to Cuba, FBI agents threatened me with
five years in jail and a $5,000 fine.
While I was in Cuba, the FBI ques-
tioned my family about my where-
abouts. I was arrested by the FBI in
Puerto Rico in 1970. They accused me
of being a Cuban agent, and they started
a smear campaign against me, saying
that I was working for the Cubans and
not for the Puerto Rican people. Over
the years, my whole family has been
visited by the FBI. My sister’s apart-
ment in New York was ransacked a
couple of times; nothing was stolen, but
all her things were thrown around on
the floor. My brothers have been har-
assed at work. The FBI tried to get them
fired.
In the early 1980s, the FBI began
watching me constantly. They put
microphones in my home and car and
wiretaps on my phone and on the public
phones across the street from my house.
They tailed me by foot, car and even
airplane. Then, in 1985, they attacked
my house. They said it was to arrest me,
but I truly thought they intended to
murder me. They came dressed in mili-
tary garb, with painted faces and bazoo-
kas, using air cover to control the whole
neighborhood, as if it were a military
commando operation.
This was in connection to your alleged
involvement in the 1983 Wells Fargo
incident?
Yes, that’s correct. But the surveil-
lance was part of their investigation
into Los Macheteros as a political or-
ganization. In 1985, Los Macheteros
assumed responsibility for the Hartford
action. At that point, the FBI redirected
its investigation; instead of accusing us
of political activities in Puerto Rico,
VOLUME XXIV, NUMBER 2 (AUGUST 1990)
5
—-they decided to accuse us of criminal
conspiracy and robbery. It was conven-
ient for them. They could try us in
Hartford, even though they alleged that
a conspiracy took place in Puerto Rico.
This is one of the reasons we are de-
manding a change of venue. If we are
going to get a fair trial, it will be in
Puerto Rico, not Hartford.
The Bush administration has proposed
a plebiscite to determine whether Puerto
Rico will remain a Commonwealth,
become a state, or achieve independ-
ence. How have Puerto Rican
independentistas reacted to this?
There are two tendencies among
independentistas. One is that of the
Puerto Rican Independence Party,*
which will participate in the plebiscite
and is convinced that Washington will
not grant statehood even if this option
wins. We think this is not only a grave
mistake, but a very dangerous policy,
because it dissipates any sense of
struggle. If statehood will never be
granted, even if it wins by a large ma-
jority, then why should we struggle
[against it]?
Everything seems to indicate that
there have been offers and negotiations
behind closed doors between the U.S.
government and the leaders of the par-
ticipating parties. The PIP has been led
* One-of Puerto Rico’s three major parties, social democratic and pro-independence. The other two are the pro-statehood New Pro-
gressive Party and the pro-Commonwealth Popular Democratic Party.
to believe that the United States has no
intention of incorporating our nation as
a state, and this is exactly the line that
has been fed to the people. At the same
time, President Bush has been actively
campaigning in favor of statehood.
The second tendency, adhered to by
other independentista organizations, is
to boycott the plebiscite, because we
consider it illegitimate, a plebiscite
without freedom, a manipulation of the
Puerto Rican people. It is a plebiscite to
calm international opinion, to ease the
pressure for decolonization. The United
Nations has established that a “transfer
of powers” is necessary before a legiti-
mate plebiscite can be held. A process
to enable people to think freely and
control their lives must take place first.
Only then-and it may take years-can
we legitimately call for a plebiscite.
For example, most of the industries
in Puerto Rico are owned by U.S. finan-
cial groups. The U.S. pharmaceutical
and electronics industries are the back-
bone of the economy. People fear that
independence would cause these enter-
prises to leave Puerto Rico. With an
official unemployment rate of over 20%, really perhaps close to 40%, people fear
for their jobs, for their survival. Sixty-
five percent of Puerto Rican families
receive food checks, the equivalent of
food stamps in the United States. The
injection of federal funds into the coun-
try is so great that the government keeps
a hold on nearly every Puerto Rican
family. How can we have a legitimate
plebiscite under conditions that create
such a sense of dependence on the North
American system, the colonial system?
La Perla neiahborhood in San Juan: Puerto Rico is Dart of Latin America
Does Los Macheteros have a plan to
move toward economic independence?
In March 1984 we put forth a pro-
gram of national reconstruction, to
move economic power into Puerto
Rican hands. Our aims were nationalis-
tic and pluralistic, not the creation of a
socialist economy, but a reform of the
capitalist system, using some elements
of a socialist program. We proposed a
mixed economy that would combine
private businesses, cooperatives, and
publicly controlled enterprises. At the
same time, we also stated our willing-
ness to negotiate with foreign-owned
industrial establishments, to seek their
cooperation in plans for national recon-
struction.
In order to carry out this program,
political empowerment is essential. We
want to ensure the implementation of a
true democracy, with representation
from all sectors of society, particularly
those traditionally ignored and abused
by the colonial administrators: workers
and the poor in general. The most im-
portant thing would be to establish a
provisional government and congress
to convene a popular discussion of what
type of government and what type of
system we Puerto Ricans want.
This is not the first time that the United
States has proposed a plebiscite for
Puerto Rico.
No, this would be the third plebi-
scite in less than 40 years. The first, in
1952, established the present Common-
wealth. But it solved nothing. Unem-
ployment, corruption, crime, drug
addiction, mental illness-all these
problems grew worse. The second plebi-
scite was in 1967.* The FBI tried to
manipulate the various parties, create
conflict among them, and interfere with
possible participation by independen-
tistas. It was a farce. The fact that there
is now talk of a third plebiscite shows
that the first two meant absolutely noth-
ing. Just as this one would mean abso-
lutely nothing.
* In the 1967 plebiscite, commonwealth
status won 60.4% of the vote, statehood
39.0%, and independence 0.6%. Voter ab-
stention was close to 30%, with most inde-
pendentistas and several pro-statehood forces
boycotting the balloting due to FBI interfer-
ence.
NACLA REPORT ON THE AMERICASIs the popular movement prepared for
nationwide struggle?
The interaction of progressive po-
litical forces in Puerto Rico has scarcely
been one of strong solidarity. Colonial-
ism and FBI intelligence operations have
kept them divided [by playing up] is-
sues with a low degree of relevance, or
through vicious personal attacks. Colo-
nialism has many ways of distorting a
society that is alienated not only from
the means of production, but also from
the basic elements of national conscious-
ness and self-esteem. Even those who
understand the nature of colonialism
lose faith in the people’s struggle and
become demoralized. Individualism,
arrogance, mistrust, personal conflicts
and manipulation-all these tend to
have an effect on popular organizing.
The enemies of the people, mainly the
FBI, reap this harvest of division and.
deepen the rifts.
Nevertheless, there is an objective
reality-that of a colony in deteriora-
tion-influencing the movement of the
Puerto Rican masses toward freedom
and true democracy. The enormous
number of people without work, the
high crime and general corruption, the
deterioration in services for education
and health care that were of low quality
to begin with, the high cost of living, the
ecological deterioration and environ-
mental contamination-all of these
elements of Puerto Rican reality deter-
mine the path of progressive forces and
the real possibilities for unity.
There is a very strong tendency
toward organizing at the local level
around the diverse issues that bring
people together. As a result, hundreds
of independent local organizations have
appeared. And there is a movement to
unify all these local organizations into
a popular front to coordinate on na-
tional issues.
Do you expect to win your case in
Hartford?
The U.S. government tries to isolate
us by calling us terrorists. But the people
of the United States must see that this is
false. To struggle for independence is
our right, just as it was your right in
1776. We need support in the United
States in order to get the fairest possible
trial in Hartford-which will never be
as fair as we could have gotten from a
jury of our peers in Puerto Rico.
Menu
