Relatório da CI - III. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES RELEVANT TO EVENTS OF APRIL AND MAY

III. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES RELEVANT TO EVENTS OF APRIL AND MAY 2006

37. The narrative of the events which follows is the product of the first component of the mandate of the Commission and the result of its fact-finding function. It is based upon all of the material which the Commission received, being in excess of 200 statements of witnesses interviewed by the Commission, and 2,000 other documents and pieces of material. Conclusions about the facts and circumstances have been made using the reasonable suspicion standard adopted by the Commission. Where the Commission has been unable to form a conclusive view using this standard, this is stated explicitly in the text.

The petitioners’ demonstration; pre-demonstration planning

38. Between 24 and 28 April 2006 a demonstration was staged outside the Government Palace in Dili. Ostensibly organized and controlled by the petitioners, the demonstration sought resolution of alleged discriminatory practices against westerners within F-FDTL.

39. Negotiations between the petitioners and senior PNTL officers regarding the conduct of the intended demonstration took place on several days between 19 and 23 April. The Military Police were not involved. Coordinated security plans were made. The petitioners assumed responsibility for security at the demonstration site. Six petitioners were detailed to conduct daily searches of all protesters. Lieutenant Gastão Salsinha, the spokesman for the petitioners, was to maintain control of the microphone and loud speaker by vetting persons who were nominated to make speeches. The Dili District Commander was to be contacted if PNTL help was required with internal security. PNTL were responsible for any incidents occurring externally. On the eve of the demonstration PNTL General Commander Martins issued a written order regarding PNTL deployment and the use of force. These included the use of Dili District Police for foot patrols, the Close Protection Unit for protection of State VIPs and the Police Reserve Unit for patrols in “critical areas”. One platoon of the Dili Task Force was to provide assistance. Two platoons of UIR officers were to be on standby. The PNTL General Commander agreed subsequently to the active deployment of UIR. The use of firearms and tear gas was prohibited without express authorization. The negotiations culminated in a press conference on 23 April 2006, during which the petitioners guaranteed that the demonstration would be peaceful and the PNTL General Commander stated that the demonstration would be stopped immediately if it became violent.

The first four days: 24 to 27 April

40. On Monday 24 April 2006 the petitioners and their sympathizers, massed at the Carantina at Taci Tolu in order to march under police escort to the Government Palace. In the main the petitioners wore F-FDTL uniforms. They were unarmed. Once established in front of the Government Palace, they remained, in fluctuating numbers, until 28 April 2006. The ranks of the petitioners and their sympathizers were augmented noticeably, from the second day of the protest onwards, by the arrival of third parties, particularly members of the group known as Colimau 2000.

41. Isolated incidents of violence occurred with increasing frequency throughout Dili during the week of the demonstration. On 25 April a kiosk and goods were destroyed in the Lecidere beach area, two youths were assaulted and market stalls belonging to easterners in the Taibessi area were burned. On the same day Ozório Leki, the spokesman for Colimau 2000, made a speech at the protest site in which he threatened to unleash the crowd if the police failed to stop the attack on market stallholders. He stated further that violence would be used to secure a change of Government. Market stalls in Taibessi were burned again the following day and an off-duty PNTL member in the area was attacked. Lieutenant Salsinha allowed Mr. Leki to make a further speech on 26 April in which he used inflammatory anti-eastern language. Prime Minister Alkatiri was informed about the presence of Ozório Leki among the petitioners and the expression of anti-Government rhetoric.

42. The petitioners expected that a government representative would visit the site of the demonstration and speak with them. The issue assumed critical importance during discussions between the Government and the petitioners on 27 April. Prime Minister Alkatiri proposed a government commission to report within three months about the issues raised by the petitioners together with a subsidy to assist reintegration into districts, but refused a request to address the petitioners at the Government Palace about the proposal. Minister for Foreign Affairs José Ramos-Horta agreed to address the petitioners the following day. The morning of 28 April 2006

43. With the demonstration scheduled to end at 1 p.m. on Friday, 28 April, a tangible change in the atmosphere of the crowd gathered in front of the Government Palace was evident by early morning. The Minister for Foreign Affairs was expected at 9 a.m. The Minister believed, however, that he was scheduled to arrive at 3 p.m. Slow-burning anger at his failure to appear reached boiling point at about midday. From about 10 a.m., threats of violence and sporadic incidents of fighting had begun to occur. Stone throwing began at about 11.30 a.m. Additionally, the number of third parties among the petitioners, which had been increasing since 25 April, suddenly spiked. Lieutenant Salsinha was unable to control the anger of the youths who had joined the protest. In this atmosphere the feeling that the petitioners were willing to die for their cause gained currency.

44. So much was known by the PNTL senior command. At a 9 a.m. meeting the PNTL General Commander gave instructions to prevent any new protestors from joining the demonstration. However, at about 10 a.m. upon the request of one petitioner, Lieutenant Florindo dos Reis, he allowed 100 additional demonstrators to be admitted. At about 11.30 a.m. the members of the Dili District Task Force and of other PNTL districts formed two lines facing the protestors. At about the same time teams of UIR officers were redeployed from the Government Palace to Becora and Comoro. The UIR Commander stated that this redeployment was ordered by PNTL Deputy Commander (Operations) Ismael da Costa Babo. This is denied by Deputy Commander (Operations) Babo. The PNTL General Commander was not informed of the redeployment. PNTL blocked the Beach Road, but were insufficient in number to block the side street as well. At about 11.45 a.m. the demonstrators began to roll up their banners. One senior PNTL commander told the Commission that he took this as a signal that something was about to happen.

45. The deteriorating stability at the demonstration site was known also to Prime Minister Alkatiri. He gave telephone instructions to the Minister of the Interior to send reinforcements the Government Palace. He telephoned President Gusmão, who agreed to telephone Lieutenant Salsinha. At about 10 a.m. the Prime Minister telephoned F-FDTL Chief of Staff Colonel Lere, the Acting Chief of the Defence Force. The Prime Minister ordered him to have the Armed Forces in readiness. Two platoons of the F-FDTL 1st Battalion in Baucau were prepared. At about 11 a.m. the Prime Minister again telephoned Colonel Lere to inform him that the situation had deteriorated further and instruct him to send Military Police officers to support PNTL. Colonel. Lere ordered six Military Police officers to the demonstration site. At about 11.45 a.m. the Prime Minister received a telephone call from the President informing him that he had met with Lieutenant Salsinha, who had promised to attempt to control the crowd and remove the petitioners from the site.

46. Close to midday, the Prime Minister, President Gusmão and Minister of the Interior Lobato spoke at the Hotel Timor at the close of an international conference. On the basis of the evidence before it, the Commission is unable to draw any conclusions as to the content of this meeting. The former Prime Minister said that he expressed the view to the President that PNTL had disintegrated and that there was a need to call upon the Armed Forces to assist. He has given inconsistent statements as to whether he told the President that he had already requested the Armed Forces to be on standby. President Gusmão told the Commission that there had been no discussion as to the need for calling in the Armed Forces. Violence at the Government Palace

47. At about midday the protesters began to move towards the Government Palace. The two PNTL lines broke almost immediately and many PNTL officers simply fled. While the Commission has heard the view that it was only western PNTL officers who abandoned their posts, perhaps at the invitation of the crowd, the available information suggests that the division between those who fled and those who did not is not so easily made. Further, at least some PNTL officers were instructed to return to the PNTL headquarters by the Dili District Commander. The small number of UIR officers who had not been redeployed was stationed both in front of the Government Palace and at the Hello Mister intersection. The Military Police officers sent by Colonel Lere joined the UIR officers at the intersection.

48. The protesters entered the Government Palace. Two vehicles were burned. Ground-floor offices were ransacked. The crowd threw stones at police. One police officer was attacked with a machete. The protesters yelled words to the effect of “shoot us if you want to” to both the UIR officers and Military Police at the Hello Mister intersection. The PNTL General Commander arrived at the scene and authorized the use of tear gas. PNTL officers also fired shots. General Commander Martins told the Commission that he had not authorized this. By about 1. p.m. senior PNTL officers had returned to the PNTL headquarters leaving a limited number of ordinary and UIR PNTL officers at the scene. Minister of the Interior Lobato arrived at the headquarters wearing a flak jacket and in a highly agitated state, yelling “kill them all”. The PNTL Chief of Operations told the Commission that the Minister of the Interior instructed him to move URP from Taibessi to the Government Palace. PNTL records show that one F2000 fully automatic machine gun and 2,000 rounds of ammunition were signed over to the Minister of the Interior by the PNTL General Commander. By about 1.30 p.m. the demonstrators had dispersed. Two civilians had been killed. Three civilians and one PNTL officer had suffered firearm injuries. One civilian and one PNTL officer had suffered other serious injuries.

Violence at the Comoro market

49. After leaving the Government Palace the demonstrators returned to Taci Tolu, escorted by PNTL and United Nations Police (UNPOL) officers. En route they passed through Comoro, a community of people of mixed eastern and western origin. A large group walked towards petitioners as they approached the market. One UIR officer was pelted with stones by the crowd and fired at least six shots, some in the air and some into the crowd. Shortly thereafter, a platoon of 21 UIR officers was sent to the airport roundabout and a second platoon of 21 UIR officers was sent to the Comoro market. Each platoon had three vehicles. Additional UIR officers not expressly deployed to the area were also present. The platoon at the market was attacked by the crowd. In response, the platoon commander ordered tear gas to be fired. The petitioners then passed through the cleared path escorted by two of the UIR vehicles. Near the market area the petitioners were subjected to gunfire. The fire came from both UIR officers travelling in the escort vehicles and members of the crowd. One civilian was killed by a weapon fired at long range. Eight civilians suffered firearm injuries. Two police officers and two civilians suffered other serious injuries.

Violence at Rai Kotu

50. After passing through Comoro, the retreating demonstrators continued towards Taci Tolu, some returning to their base at the Carantina and others dispersing into the hills. As the mob moved through the area, in excess of 100 houses, owned mainly by easterners, were burned. This selective damage was observed by the Commissioners during a visit to the area in August 2006.

51. Demonstrators armed with bows and arrows gathered at Rai Kotu. At about 5 p.m. two FFDTL vehicles carrying 14 soldiers travelled past this group en route from the Military Police headquarters in Caicoli towards the F-FDTL headquarters in Taci Tolu. On the return journey, made at about 5.15 p.m., the vehicles encountered the same group, which had constructed a barricade of sorts with burning tyres. As the vehicles approached, the demonstrators threw grenades at the F-FDTL vehicles. The 14 F-FDTL soldiers responded with gunfire. Some soldiers alighted while other soldiers remained in the vehicles. Approximately 100 shots were fired in five minutes. The attackers dispersed. One civilian was killed as a result of the confrontation. One soldier sustained a minor injury to his finger as a result of a grenade explosion. A few minutes after this incident occurred, two civilians were injured as a result of F-FDTL weapons fire close to the Taci Tolu terminal.

The calling out of F-FDTL

52. At about 6 p.m. on 28 April, a meeting was held at the residence of Prime Minister Alkatiri during which the security situation was discussed. The participants were: the Prime Minister; the Minister of the Interior, Rogerio Lobato; the Minister of State Administration, Ana Pessoa; the Minister of Defence, Roque Rodrigues; the Acting Chief of the Defence Force, Colonel Lere; and the PNTL General Commander, Paulo Martins. Accounts of this meeting vary, particularly as to whether the Prime Minister authorized F-FDTL to use force against the petitioners. The result of the meeting was, in short, a decision that F-FDTL would be deployed to assist PNTL to restore order and contain the petitioners. Geographic areas of responsibility of both PNTL and F-FDTL were established. Significantly, the F-FDTL was given responsibility for Taci Tolu.

53. In a report to the President of the National Parliament dated 11 May 2006, Prime Minister Alkatiri styled the decision of this meeting to deploy F-FDTL as one of the “Crisis Cabinet” pursuant to article 20 of Timor-Leste Decree-Law 7/2004 and section 115 (1) (c) of the Constitution of Timor-Leste. The legality of this decision is considered elsewhere in this report. Here it is sufficient to note the following. No orders were given in writing. No formal declaration of the state of crisis was made. During the meeting no contact was made or attempted with the President. Prime Minister Alkatiri telephoned the President the following day. The Minister for Foreign Affairs did not attend. Colonel Lere telephoned the Minister the following morning to inform him of the Prime Minister’s orders, having been too busy to do so on the evening of 28 April.

54. While the nature and basis of the F-FDTL intervention may have changed following the decision of the persons assembled at the residence of the Prime Minister, the Commission is satisfied that F-FDTL was made ready to intervene and did intervene in the events of the day well before this decision was made. Colonel Lere deployed the Military Police to the Government Palace on the instruction of the Prime Minister at about 11 a.m. Regular F-FDTL soldiers were involved in a confrontation with demonstrators and civilians at Rai Kotu at about 5.15 p.m. The two platoons from the 1st Battalion of F-FDTL, ordered to be on stand-by at 10 a.m., arrived in Metinaro from Baucau at about 5.30 p.m., and one platoon was sent immediately to the Military Police headquarters in Caicoli.

55. Both PNTL and F-FDTL patrolled the city of Dili and its outskirts during the night of 28 April into the daylight hours of 29 April 2006. In part, the purpose of these patrols was to control the movement of the petitioners. F-FDTL and PNTL had differing perspectives as to the breadth of this purpose. The PNTL perspective articulated to the Commission was that petitioners were to be arrested and handed to PNTL only if they were moving about, and that no operations to capture petitioners were authorized. On the other hand, F-FDTL soldiers acted under orders that they were to search for petitioners and shoot them if they attempted to escape.

Violence at Taci Tolu

56. Gunfire was heard throughout the night, particularly in the western area of Dili where FFDTL had established positions at Rai Kotu, Taci Tolu and Beduku. Rumours that F-FDTL had massacred 60 people took root on 29 April and grew rapidly thereafter, even to the extent of citing the licence plate number of the F-FDTL truck said to have been used to transport the corpses, either in boxes or a shipping container, from Taci Tolu to Viqueque District on 1 May 2006. The Commission states that this rumour of a massacre perpetrated and subsequently covered up by FFDTL is precisely that: an unfounded rumour not supported by fact.

57. The evidence establishes that in addition to the one civilian killed at Rai Kotu, another two civilians were killed overnight. In addition to the two civilians injured close to Taci Tolu terminal during the afternoon of 28 April, two others sustained gunshot injuries overnight. Numerous civilians, not exclusively petitioners, were arrested and later released. While the Commission recognizes the possibility that several other deaths may have occurred, extensive efforts by a variety of individuals and agencies have failed to find any evidence of a massacre. These efforts have included: an appeal made by the Office of the Provedor on both radio and television for
families with missing persons to come forward; a similar appeal made in leaflets distributed in internally displaced persons (IDP) camps; preliminary investigations made by the Government-established Committee for the Verification of Details about Fatalities and Wounded; and investigations undertaken as part of the mandate of the Commission. Lieutenant Salsinha confirmed that no petitioners are missing. Accordingly, the Commission states that on the basis of all of the evidence before it, no massacre occurred.

The withdrawal of F-FDTL

58. Chief of the Defence Force Brigadier General Ruak had learned of the actions of F-FDTL from an Internet report read while travelling in Indonesia during the late afternoon of 28 April. He decided to return immediately to Timor-Leste. He attended a meeting at the residence of the Prime Minister at about 4 p.m. on 29 April 2006 with all those who had been present at 6 p.m. the day before. A decision was made to withdraw the F-FDTL forces from the city to the outskirts of Dili, but to continue joint Military Police and PNTL patrols within the city. The withdrawal did not take effect on 30 April 2006 as planned, but was achieved by 4 May when F-FDTL forces returned to both Taci Tolu and Metinaro bases, leaving some soldiers stationed at the Military Police headquarters. Joint Military Police and PNTL patrols operated throughout Dili from 30 April to 3 May. These ceased when Major Alfredo Reinado, the Commander of the Military Police, abandoned his post on 3 May 2006.

The departure of Major Reinado.

59. Major Reinado departed with both F-FDTL Military Police officers and UIR PNTL officers during the evening of 3 May 2006. The group took their arms and ammunition and travelled to Ermera District where a meeting was held with the petitioners. The two groups did not merge. That of Major Reinado remained in the area until 8 May 2006, on which date the group relocated to Aileu. The number of members of what became known as “Alfredo’s group” fluctuated over the next few days. The numbers were swelled by URP PNTL members, who joined on 4 May, and by regular F-FDTL soldiers, who joined later. The numbers reduced when 7 of the 11 UIR PNTL officers who had originally left with Major Reinado returned to PNTL on 5 or 6 May following a telephone call from General Commander Martins to one of them threatening dismissal if they did not return to PNTL within 48 hours.

60. Major Reinado told the Commission that he remained loyal to the President as the Supreme Commander of F-FDTL and broke the chain of command because there was no written order
authorizing the use of F-FDTL to control the civilian population on 28 April and subsequently. There is evidence before the Commission that President Gusmão was in contact with Major Reinado following the latter’s desertion. The Commission is satisfied that this contact was no more than an attempt by the President to contain and control Major Reinado. There is no evidence that an armed group of men under the command of Major Reinado carried out criminal actions on the orders or with the authority of the President.

Violence in Gleno on 8 May 2006

61. Several hundred people gathered in Gleno on 8 May to protest the massacre rumoured to have taken place on 28/29 April 2006. Some evidence suggests that the demonstration was part of the 10 District Movement led by Major Agusto Tara de Araujo and designed to boycott Government in the 10 western districts. Major Tara had deserted F-FDTL on 4 May. The PNTL General Commander ordered two armed teams of six UIR officers to accompany the Secretary of State for Region III, Egidio de Jesus, and the Administrator of Ermera District, Saturnino Babo, to Gleno. Upon their arrival, the crowd, which included petitioners, yelled that eastern UIR officers were the enemy and had shot at petitioners at Comoro market on 28 April. The eastern UIR officers were forced to take shelter in the District Administration building. The building was then surrounded by the crowd. Armed with knives, sticks, machetes and rocks, the crowd began to shout death threats against the eastern UIR officers.

62. PNTL Deputy General Commander (Operations) Babo arrived on the order of the Minister of the Interior and with the knowledge of the PNTL General Commander. He was accompanied by a small number of PNTL officers. A negotiating committee was formed. It included ex-FALINTIL Commander Ernesto Fernandes, alias Dudu, and Father Adriano Ola. After a lengthy standoff with the crowd, Deputy Commander Babo disarmed six eastern UIR officers and removed their flak jackets. They were escorted to waiting vehicles. As the cars were leaving the scene two of the disarmed UIR officers either fell or were pulled from one of the vehicles. They were both stabbed by members of the crowd. The PNTL officers who had arrived with Deputy Commander Babo fired shots in the air to disperse the crowd. One UIR officer died and the other was seriously injured. 63. The body of the dead policeman was taken to Dili Hospital, where large numbers of UIR officers and the UIR Commander had gathered. The eastern UIR officers threatened to carry the body of the deceased through the streets of Dili before taking it to General Commander Martin’s house. That evening an eastern PNTL officer made a radio announcement blaming General Commander Martins and Deputy Commander Babo for the death of the UIR officer. Deputy Commander Babo did not return to Dili.

Armed confrontation in Fatu Ahi on 23 May 2006

64. By 22 May both the PNTL and F-FDTL possessed intelligence that PNTL URP officers were encouraging and supporting east versus west violence in the Fatu Ahi area. Plans for a joint F-FDTL and PNTL post were made. At about 11 a.m. on 23 May two vehicles carrying nine FFDTL 1st Battalion soldiers under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Falur arrived in Fatu Ahi to rendezvous with PNTL officers. They were to conduct a field site assessment of the planned joint position. The vehicles stopped near the summit of Fatu Ahi. As the soldiers alighted from the vehicles they saw men in police uniforms behind the school and trees. These men were not the PNTL officers expected; they were members of Alfredo’s group.

65. Major Reinado and 11 of his men had arrived in the area from Aileu that morning. They were with civilians and 10 URP officers armed with automatic rifles. At about 9 a.m. two journalists arrived and commenced a videotaped interview with Major Reinado. The start of the armed confrontation is captured on that footage. The shooting was initiated by Major Reinado on the count of 10 after issuing a warning to leave. Lieutenant Colonel Falur ordered the soldiers to return fire.

66. The confrontation at Fatu Ahi lasted until nightfall. Alfredo’s group surrounded the FFDTL soldiers, not all of whom were armed, making it impossible for them to withdraw. Lieutenant Colonel Falur sought reinforcements. A PNTL vehicle with 10 PNTL officers travelling between Baucau and Dili was caught in the fire. One PNTL officer was killed and two were injured. At about midday the first F-FDTL reinforcements arrived, three of whom were injured. At about the same time a F-FDTL bus carrying soldiers to Dili to collect their wages arrived after its passengers heard gunfire. It was attacked about 300 metres to the west of the original ambush site. One of these soldiers died and three were injured. Later, Major Rai Ria arrived with an escort and both were injured. At about 2 p.m. Major Amico arrived from Metinaro with about 10 men. He approached Fatu Ahi from around the hill and obtained a higher position above Major Alfredo and his men. Major Alfredo then withdrew, using a PNTL vehicle which was later returned. Two of Major Reinado’s men and one civilian were killed. In total, five people were killed and 10 injured. Armed confrontation in Taci Tolu/Tibar on 24 and 25 May

67. F-FDTL had observed suspicious movements in the hills of Taci Tolu and Tibar since about 19 May. On the morning of 24 May eight F-FDTL soldiers conducting an observation patrol in the hills were attacked and contained by a group of armed persons from a higher position. This group comprised police officers from Liquiça District, petitioners and armed civilians of the Rai Los group. A second group of F-FDTL soldiers sent from the nearby F-FDTL headquarters was also attacked and contained by the same group. As the fighting intensified, F-FDTL reinforced their positions in the hills by sending a navy vessel into Tibar Bay. The battle lasted until late in the afternoon when fire from the boat forced the attacking group to retreat.

68. On 25 May, the attacking group returned to the hills of Taci Tolu. They fired upon two FFDTL squads sent to patrol the hills. In the meantime, another two F-FDTL squads led by Captain Kaikeri were deployed as reinforcements. The fighting started at around 7 a.m. and lasted until afternoon, although it was not as intense as the previous day. The figures are not certain, but evidence before the Commission suggests that as many as nine people were killed and three suffered firearm injuries a result of this violence.

Attack on the residence of Brigadier General Ruak

69. At about 8 a.m. on 24 May the F-FDTL protection unit stationed at the residence of Brigadier General Ruak observed about 10 PNTL officers, including Deputy Commander Abilio Mesquita, close to the house. All the PNTL officers were armed with Steyr weapons except Mr. Mesquita, who carried an F2000 fully automatic machine gun. Later in the morning the armed PNTL officers were seen even closer to the house. Mr. Mesquita then gave a hand signal which precipitated gunfire from his group directed against the house. The resulting exchange of fire continued until around 5 p.m. At about midday, the F-FDTL protection unit moved to the primary school situated above the house in order to gain a better vantage point. One of the PNTL officers was killed by a soldier about 30 minutes later. The soldiers, who were armed with M16 weapons and rifle-propelled grenades, then came under heavy automatic weapons fire from the east. They responded with heavy fire, including the launching of several grenades, and were reinforced by FFDTL soldiers throughout the day.

70. During the afternoon of 24 May Brigadier General Ruak telephoned Member of Parliament Leandro Isaac, who passed the telephone to Abilio Mesquita. Both Mr. Isaac and Commander Mesquita live near General Ruak. Mr. Isaac was armed with a Steyr weapon and at least three men armed variously with Steyr and FN-FNC semi-automatic weapons were present. The Brigadier General requested that the shooting cease to allow his children to be evacuated from the house. The Ruak children were taken to safety during a ceasefire on the evening of 24 May. The exchange of fire between the PNTL officers under the command of Commander Mesquita and F-FDTL recommenced on the morning of 25 May and continued until about 5 p.m.

Armed confrontation between PNTL and F-FDTL at the PNTL headquarters

71. By the evening of 24 May 2006, any relationship that existed between F-FDTL and PNTL was one of mutual suspicion. Rumours of a planned attack by F-FDTL upon the PNTL headquarters began to circulate. Tip-offs about the impending attack were made by three different people within F-FDTL to three different people within PNTL, apparently as a result of friendships that were stronger than allegiances to F-FDTL. The tip-offs were reported to the PNTL Chief of Operations, the PNTL Dili District Commander, the Minister of the Interior, the Prime Minister and UNPOL. Indeed, one UNPOL officer reported the presence of machine guns on the roof of the former United Nations Peacekeeping Force (PKF) building during the afternoon of 24 May.

72. The PNTL Deputy General Commander (Administration), Lino Saldanha, who had been armed by and was by then operating under F-FDTL command, gave the last tip-off at about 2 a.m. on 25 May. In a telephone call to his administrative assistant, Commander Saldanha warned that FFDTL would be coming to the PNTL headquarters to kill people. He asked specifically whether Chief of Operations de Jesus was present. Commander Saldanha made further telephone calls at about 9 a.m. and 10 a.m., the latter to Chief of Operations de Jesus, instructing all PNTL members to return to the PNTL headquarters.

73. Throughout the night of 24 to 25 May the F-FDTL hierarchy armed in excess of 200 civilians and PNTL officers and moved these civilians and officers to various locations in Dili. This process was organized as a response to the perceived threat posed to F-FDTL by PNTL. At about 1 a.m. 64 PNTL officers who had been armed by F-FDTL in Baucau left to go to Fatu Ahi. They were then sent to Military Police headquarters and from there to guard the water reservoir at Bairro Pite. At about 4 a.m. F-FDTL soldiers were also sent to Bairro Pite with orders to prevent petitioners from entering the city. Other F-FDTL soldiers were sent to the ex-PKF building and told to be ready. By daylight, 84 soldiers were present at this location. This included some troops who had been stationed in Dili well before 25 May.

74. Some time during 25 May the Prime Minister contacted both Brigadier General Ruak and PNTL Chief of Operations de Jesus, then the most senior PNTL officer in Dili, encouraging them to work together. Prime Minister Alkatiri provided the Brigadier General with the telephone number of the Chief of Operations.

75. During the morning of 25 May a convoy of PNTL vehicles passed in front of the Leader store in Comoro. Armed soldiers were present on the street. Two vehicles passed the police cars. The first was a white pick-up truck carrying three men in uniform armed with M16 weapons. The second was a red truck carrying between 15 and 20 armed men, some wearing uniforms and others in civilian clothes. The men from these vehicles and the soldiers on the street fired upon the police vehicles, wounding one PNTL officer in the legs. The police returned fire before returning, at speed, to the PNTL headquarters. The report of the shooting caused panic among the PNTL officers. Some armed themselves and assumed positions around the PNTL compound. Simultaneously, F-FDTL soldiers within the ex-PKF building heard a report that PNTL officers had opened fire upon F-FDTL soldiers in Comoro before decamping, at speed, to their headquarters. While the Commission is satisfied, on the basis of evidence of independent witnesses, that F-FDTL initiated the exchange of fire, at the time each side believed that they had been attacked by the other.

76. A tense hour passed. Then, at about 11 a.m., a red pick-up truck drove towards the PNTL headquarters. PNTL officers who witnessed this suspected that the expected attack would be launched from that truck. One fired a single warning shot. Almost immediately two grenades were fired by F-FDTL from the ex-PKF building. One landed near the university gym and the second exploded on the PNTL building, injuring three officers. PNTL then returned fire and an intense exchange of fire followed.

77. The F-FDTL position articulated to the Commission is that F-FDTL had earlier come under fire from PNTL stationed both at the PNTL headquarters and the Ministry of Justice and, further, that this fire was aimed specifically at the second floor meeting room of the ex-PKF building where Brigadier General Ruak and Colonel Lere had been present since about 8 a.m. The Commission has received no evidence to support this position. To the contrary, on the basis of independent evidence the Commission is satisfied that the exchange of fire was triggered unintentionally by the single warning shot fired by a PNTL officer. The Commission is satisfied further that although there is information which suggests the possibility that F-FDTL were
preparing to launch an attack against the PNTL headquarters, the exchange of fire that commenced at 11 a.m. on 25 May was not the execution of that attack.

78. Upon hearing the shot the initial response of the F-FDTL soldiers was confused and the evidence remains unclear whether that response was spontaneous or carried out under order. Initially all of the F-FDTL fire came from within the ex-PKF building. Later, under order, the FFDTL soldiers also took up positions to the west, south and east of the PNTL building, with a few F-FDTL soldiers also to the north. A group of about six soldiers took up positions at the Ministry of Justice intersection.

79. Five UNPOL officers within the PNTL building had established radio contact with UNPOL officers at Obrigado Barracks at about 11.30 a.m. As a result UNPOL Senior Adviser Saif Malik became aware that the UNPOL officers were trapped, that PNTL officers had been injured and that PNTL wanted to organize a ceasefire, but were unable to contact the F-FDTL commanders. At around 12.30 p.m. Mr. Malik and Colonel Reis, the Chief Military Training Adviser, who had also heard the radio communications, each spoke separately with the Special Representative of the Secretary-General. Both men sought and were granted permission to intervene. While the Special Representative of the Secretary-General did not inform Colonel Reis, who was the second in time to speak to him, that permission had already been granted to Mr. Malik, the two men spoke shortly thereafter. Mr. Malik wanted to send UNPOL officers with Colonel Reis to meet with Brigadier General Ruak. Colonel Reis refused, believing that the presence of more police officers wearing blue shirts would aggravate the situation.

80. Colonel Reis, his deputy and another officer departed Obrigado Barracks in a United Nations vehicle with the United Nations flag held from the rear passenger window. Colonel Reis spoke with Brigadier General Ruak in the entrance to the ex-PKF building. The conversation lasted from 5 to 10 minutes, during which the shooting continued. A ceasefire was established. Although Brigadier General Ruak denies that the ceasefire was conditional upon the disarming of PNTL, the Commission is satisfied that the conditions of the ceasefire were that PNTL would be disarmed, the weapons would be taken by the United Nations officers and any PNTL officer who remained behind would be subject to a new attack. The Brigadier General gave his officers the order to cease fire. Colonel Lere sent runners to communicate the order to the soldiers not within earshot.

81. As Colonel Reis was leaving the ex-PKF building, two UNPOL officers arrived in the armoured United Nations vehicle made available to Mr. Malik by the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General. These UNPOL officers had been sent to the area by Mr. Malik. The two United Nations vehicles then drove towards the PNTL headquarters arriving at about 1 p.m. Again the United Nations flag was displayed from the car of Colonel Reis. The ceasefire arrangements were explained to Chief of Operations Afonso de Jesus. Colonel Reis stressed that the surrender of arms was voluntary and only disarmed police officers would be allowed to leave. As the process of collecting weapons began, an additional six United Nations vehicles carrying UNPOL officers, including Mr. Malik, arrived. Colonel Reis and Mr. Malik had a heated verbal exchange. As the weapons collection was finalized, the PNTL officers were assembled in columns on the road flanked by United Nations vehicles.

82. A few minutes after the United Nations vehicles entered the PNTL headquarters and after the ceasefire had taken effect, one soldier, Ricardo Ribeiro Bure, was killed near the PNTL perimeter wall from a burst of fire originating from within the PNTL compound. F-FDTL soldier Francisco Amaral appeared at the Ministry of Justice intersection. His uniform was partially soaked in blood. An UNPOL officer asked if he had been injured, and was told that Mr. Amaral’s friend had just been killed by PNTL.

Shooting of PNTL officers

83. Colonel Reis led the PNTL officers on foot from their headquarters towards the Ministry of Justice intersection. He was carrying the United Nations flag. Before leaving the officers were warned to avoid eye contact with the soldiers on the side of the road and were warned not to run. F-FDTL soldiers involved in the shooting have told the Commission that the assembled police were arrogant and singing; however, the Commission accepts contrary evidence that the demeanour of the PNTL officers indicated that they were afraid. A feeble attempt at singing the national anthem quickly died. The same F-FDTL soldiers have told the Commission that they were uncertain if the PNTL officers had actually surrendered because they did not have their hands on their heads, they could have been concealing weapons in their backpacks and they were marching not behind a white flag, but that of the United Nations.

84. The column set off at about 1.45 p.m. Lieutenant Colonel Mann and an UNPOL officer went ahead of the column to speak with the F-FDTL soldiers on the street in an attempt to keep things calm. When most of the policemen had walked through the intersection, one F-FDTL soldier appeared to be agitated and searching for someone among the police officers. The F-FDTL soldiers say that one of the policemen had made a rude hand gesture at them. Mr. Malik attempted to speak with the agitated soldier, but the soldier sidestepped and fired into the policemen. There was then gunfire from three corners of the intersection. The soldiers fired at PNTL officers already on the ground. Evidence before the Commission indicates that at least six F-FDTL soldiers were involved in the shooting. Contrary to persistent rumour, there is no evidence that PNTL officers, including those armed and given uniforms by F-FDTL, were involved in the shooting. The shooting lasted about two or three minutes and involved at least 100 rounds of ammunition. Eight PNTL officers were killed and 27 others suffered serious gunshot injuries.

85. Mr. Malik coordinated the evacuation of the wounded officers to Obrigado Barracks. This destination was chosen because the wounded PNTL officers expressed fear of F-FDTL reprisal if they were taken to the hospital. Colonel Reis and his deputy remonstrated with Brigadier General Ruak, who apologized for the shooting. Three soldiers allegedly responsible for the shooting were paraded before the Brigadier General. Only one admitted to having participated in the shooting and stated that he was upset by the PNTL killing of Bure after the ceasefire had been established.

Burning of the da Silva family home

86. During the morning of 25 May a large group of young men carrying bottles of gasoline and matches assembled in the Bebonuk area of Western Dili. They were heard to say that they were looking for the houses of westerners. Many houses of westerners were pelted with rocks and set ablaze. At about 12.30 p.m. the house of the da Silva family, relatives of the Minister of the Interior, located in the Fomento 1 area, was set alight. The house was surrounded by a high wall. The attackers surrounded the house inside that wall. Neighbours on the outside of the wall spoke to one of the women trapped inside and could hear rocks being thrown at the windows. The trapped woman said that they were surrounded by armed people and unable to get out. Two children who had managed to escape from the house heard those in the crowd say “Lobato is inside”. The Commission has received information that a crowd of people had gathered in front of the house a few days previously and chanted threats against “the family of the Minister of the Interior”. At about 2 p.m. a neighbour used a garden hose to extinguish the flames in the parts of the house still burning. The flames were fully extinguished by 3 p.m. Six people were killed in the fire, including four children under the age of 18.

Violence at Mercado Lama

87. At about 3 p. m. a roadblock was established on the orders of the Military Police on Avendis Bispo de Menderis, about 50 metres south of the roundabout at Mercado Lama. It was manned by Oan Kiak, an ex-FALINTIL soldier, and his men for the purpose of finding and detaining armed PNTL officers. Vehicles were stopped and searched. At about 5 p.m. a vehicle passed at speed. Mr. Kiak and his men opened fire, injuring the priest who was driving. Shortly thereafter, a red Polytron truck approached the roadblock from the north and accelerated, rather than slowed, in front of the roadblock. Mr. Kiak and others opened fire on the vehicle, killing one man and injuring one other.

The role of weapons in the events
Weapons transferred to civilians

88. On 8 May a meeting between the Prime Minister; the Minister of the Interior; and Vicente da Conceicao, aka Rai Los; an ex-FALINTIL soldier and two of his men took place at the residence of the Prime Minister. Ostensibly this meeting was called by the Minister of the Interior to discuss security for the upcoming FRETILIN Party Congress. Accounts of this meeting vary substantially. The only issue upon which the participants agree is that there was no discussion about weapons. Rai Los told the Commission that the Prime Minister had instructed him to “eliminate” petitioners and government opponents, and that he understood the word to mean kill. Former Prime Minister Alkatiri denies using the word “eliminate” and states that Rai Los and his two men had been brought to him by the Minister of the Interior as guides who would assist delegates from the western districts attend the FRETILIN Party Congress on 17 May.

89. The former Prime Minister stated that during the meeting he took the opportunity to discuss with the Minister of the Interior the need for a group of civilians to support the URP PNTL, but that there was no discussion about the provision of weapons or uniforms to such a group. The Commission notes that the manner in which the issue of civilian support to URP was discussed between the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Interior was highly irregular. Neither before nor after this meeting was the Commander of URP or the General Commander of PNTL ever invited to give their opinion about the need for, or informed about the decision to provide, civilian support to this unit.

90. Also on 8 May 2006 Minister of the Interior Lobato ordered the Commander of UPF, Antonio da Cruz, to deliver 15 HK33 semi-automatic assault rifles to his residence. These weapons were among the 180 HK33 firearms distributed legally to UPF. Eastern members of UPF had been disarmed by Commander da Cruz to make these weapons available. The Minister of the Interior arranged separately for PNTL ammunition to be delivered. He used the weapons to arm two distinct groups of civilians. The first was a group of 31 civilians under the command of Rai Los. The second was a group known as Lima Lima (55) under the command of Antonio Lurdes, aka Antonio 55. The Minister of the Interior told Commander da Cruz to give 10 of the rifles, 6,000 rounds of ammunition and 10 magazines to Rai Los in Liquiça. At about 10 p.m. that night Rai Los met Commander da Cruz in a cemetery to receive the weapons. During the same evening the Chief of Staff of the Minister of the Interior travelled to Ermera and gave the remaining five HK33 rifles and one crate of ammunition to Antonio 55. The Lima Lima group was told to await further instructions. At about 9 p.m. on 21 May Commander da Cruz and Rai Los met at a deserted location, this time near Maubara. On the instructions of the Minister of the Interior, Rai Los received a further eight HK33 weapons and 16 magazines.

91. Minister Lobato did not instruct Rai Los to support URP. Instead, the Rai Los group was sent to various locations, including to Tibar on 23 May. On 22 May the Minister paid US$ 33,000 cash for two vehicles and arranged for the windows to be tinted overnight. The vehicles were delivered to Rai Los along with 31 URP PNTL uniforms on 23 May. On 24 May Rai Los and his men, dressed in these URP uniforms, participated in the attack on the patrolling F-FDTL soldiers. There is no evidence that the Lima Lima group was ever activated by the Minister of the Interior.

92. The PNTL General Commander became aware of the distribution of PNTL HK33 weapons to civilians by the Minister of the Interior on 19 May. On the advice of Minister for Foreign Affairs Ramos-Horta, the General Commander wrote a letter to the Prime Minister outlining the information. General Commander Martins states that this letter was delivered to the secretary to the Prime Minister on 19 May. There is no evidence allowing the Commission to conclude that the Prime Minister ever received this letter.

93. At around 8 p.m. on 21 May a meeting was held at the residence of the Prime Minister. Present were: Prime Minister Alkatiri, Minister for Foreign Affairs Ramos-Horta, Minister of Defence Rodrigues, Minister of the Interior Lobato, Chief of the Defence Force Brigadier General Ruak and PNTL General Commander Martins. It is clear that the general issue of weapons distribution was raised by Minister Ramos-Horta. The weight of the evidence before the Commission suggests that Minister of the Interior Lobato stated that weapons from UPF had been brought to Dili as a security measure and no one thereafter pressed the issue. Prime Minister Alkatiri requested an inspection of the armouries of both F-FDTL and PNTL.

94. The Commission has studied carefully the statements made to it concerning the distribution of PNTL weapons to civilians. Although the Commission does not accept that at the meeting on 8 May the former Prime Minister gave instructions to Rai Los to “eliminate” his political opponents, on the basis of all of the information before it the Commission is satisfied that there is a reasonable suspicion that the former Prime Minister at least had knowledge about the distribution of PNTL weapons to civilians. The Commission does not accept the statements made by both the former Prime Minister and the former Minister of the Interior that civilian support to the PNTL was lawful under the terms of the Internal Security Act.

F-FDTL weapons

95. On 17 May the Brigadier General wrote to the Prime Minister requesting an audit of the FFDTL armoury in response to allegations that civilians had been observed carrying F-FDTL weapons. The evidence before the Commission establishes that F-FDTL began to arm civilians on 24 May 2006. This was done on the order of Brigadier General Ruak and with the knowledge of the Minister of Defence. F-FDTL kept some records of the weapons issued to the 206 civilians armed in this way. Lists of names and corresponding serial numbers of weapons were made, but recipients did not sign for weapons. These civilians included ex-FALINTIL fighters and 64 PNTL officers. To facilitate the process, leaders of former clandestine organizations were contacted. Oan Kiak arrived at Metinaro Barracks after receiving a phone call from the Brigadier General to report for duty. He was supplied with a Minimi weapon, 400 rounds of ammunition and a military uniform. On 25 May Mr. Kiak used the weapon during the shooting near the Mercado Lama.

96. Brigadier General Ruak told the Commission that he was aware that there was no specific law allowing for the arming of “reservists”. He stated that he was authorized to do so by the Minister of Defence after he had made the proposal. It was a political decision for which the Minister was responsible. The Brigadier General stated that the decision had been made as a result of a lack of capacity in F-FDTL following the attack in Fatu Ahi on 23 May, the attack on his residence on 24 May and the attack on F-FDTL soldiers in Taci Tolu and Tibar on 24 May. The last incident was characterized by the Brigadier General as an attack on F-FDTL headquarters. On the basis of the evidence before it the Commission is not satisfied that this incident was indeed an attack on the F-FDTL headquarters, as opposed to F-FDTL soldiers, but notes that the Brigadier General was not present during the incident.

Irregular movement of weapons within the security forces

97. PNTL. The Commission notes with concern the absence of systematic control over PNTL weapons and ammunition. The PNTL General Commander removed weapons from the PNTL National Armoury without the knowledge of the armoury officer. On 23 March 60 Steyr weapons and 50 boxes of ammunition were sent to the URP compound at Alieu. On 15 April 10 Steyr weapons and ammunition were sent to the Liquiça police station. Following the 25 May incident he ordered 10 Steyr weapons and ammunition to be stored at Gleno police station. The Commission also notes with concern the selective arming of western PNTL officers under the command of PNTL Dili District Deputy Commander Abilio Mesquita, who conducted weapons training of 10 western PNTL officers from the Dili District Task Force on 11 May. Thereafter, those officers remained under his command and were armed with Steyr weapons. A further 20 western PNTL officers were armed with Steyr weapons by Commander Mesquita on 17 May and thereafter came under his command. This training and arming of western PNTL officers was done with the authority of the PNTL General Commander.

98. A recent weapons audit conducted by an international team has found that 219 PNTL weapons remain outside PNTL custody and control. These weapons comprise 190 Glock 9 mm pistols, 13 Steyr semi-automatic assault rifles, 10 HK33 semi-automatic assault rifles, 2 FN-FNC semi-automatic assault rifles and 4 12-gauge shotguns. While PNTL records identify the last known signatory for the majority of these weapons, the habit of transferring weapons absent of either written orders or documentation about the chain of custody renders it impossible to determine the current whereabouts of these weapons.

99. F-FDTL. The Commission notes with concern the irregularities in the F-FDTL weapons holdings spanning several years. The baseline of 1,200 M16 weapons issued to F-FDTL by the Government is established by 2002 records. The recently conducted international weapons audit established that in February 2004 F-FDTL held 1,230 M16 weapons. The additional 30 weapons were not provided by the Government. By November 2005 the F-FDTL could account for only 1,073 M16 weapons. Although F-FDTL has stated that in 2006 they hold 1,200 M16 weapons, the records reveal that 45 M16 weapons are missing. Additionally, three FN-FNC semi-automatic rifles, three SKS semi-automatic rifles and two Uzi weapons previously within the custody and control of F-FDTL are missing. F-FDTL is also in possession of one Minimi, one .38 Special, one Browning 9 mm, two G3 semi-automatic rifles, one M16 A1 rifle and one M2 .50-calibre firearm, the provenance of which is unexplained. Also unexplained is the pedigree of 342 “ex-FALINTIL weapons” in the possession of F-FDTL.

The impact of the events

100. Significant loss of life, injury and widespread property damage resulted from the events of April and May as examined as part of the mandate of the Commission. At the conclusion of its inquiries, the Commission had information that up to 38 people were killed: 23 civilians, 12 PNTL officers and 3 F-FDTL soldiers. The Commission repeats that there is no evidence of a massacre of 60 people at Taci Tolu having taken place on 28/29 April. The Commission also has information that 69 people suffered injuries: 37 civilians, 23 PNTL officers, 7 F-FDTL soldiers and 2 UNPOL officers. The Commission notes that such figures are difficult to confirm and accepts that there may be discrepancies in the exact numbers. 101. Further, the events and incidents considered in this report had a devastating impact on the community at large. In addition to those killed or injured, approximately 150,000 persons were displaced (some 73,000 persons in IDP camps in and around Dili and a further 78,000 having moved to districts outside Dili). While displacement built up progressively after 28 April, the largest increase in displacement occurred after the events of 25 May. The population of the IDP camps increased by 300 per cent in 24 hours. An estimated 1,650 houses were destroyed in the aftermath of events recounted here, with the majority occurring in late May and early June. The impact not only related to housing, but impeded men, women and children’s enjoyment of a number of their economic and social rights, including to food, education, employment, and the highest attainable standard of health. According to UNICEF surveys, 15 per cent of children in the IDP camps needed immediate treatment for malnutrition; 57 per cent of respondents to a World Food Programme survey reported that they had ceased their primary income or livelihood activity. Shortages of food occurred both in camps and as a result of the pressure on extended family, who were hosting displaced persons outside Dili. In the case of the national medical hospital, access has been impeded by a perception that it is unsafe for western persons to go to the hospital. Freedom of movement has also been restricted. While there has been a well-coordinated humanitarian response, involving collaborative work between Government and the NGO community, and many persons have returned to their employment, the affects of the incidents remain evident in the continued displacement and associated problems.

.

Relatório da CI - II. BACKGROUND TO THE CRISIS OF APRIL AND MAY 2006

II. BACKGROUND TO THE CRISIS OF APRIL AND MAY 2006

18. The crisis that occurred in Timor-Leste between 28 April and 25 May can be explained
largely by the frailty of State institutions and the weakness of the rule of law. However, this
explanation can only be understood fully in the historical and cultural context of the country. Both the Portuguese and Indonesian eras created and subsumed internal divisions within Timor-Leste.

Political competition within Timor-Leste has been historically settled through violence.
Accordingly, many Timorese view the events of April and May 2006 as a continuum starting from the decolonization process in 1974/75 and encompassing the violence and factionalism of the Indonesian occupation and the violence that accompanied the United Nations-sponsored Popular Consultation in 1999.

Portuguese decolonization

19. The 1974 Carnation Revolution in Portugal triggered political activity in Portuguese
Timor. The Timorese Democratic Union (UDT) was formed in May 1974 and ASDT shortly
thereafter. ASDT became FRETILIN in September 1974. The relationship between these two
parties had deteriorated by mid-1975. On 11 August 1975 UDT launched a pre-emptive armed
attack upon FRETILIN. The counter-attack was launched on 20 August 1975. This date is now
commemorated as the day of the founding of the Armed Forces for the National Liberation of East Timor (FALINTIL). A short civil war ensued in which thousands of people were killed in combat, hundreds of political prisoners were executed and tens of thousands of civilians were displaced to West Timor. On 7 September 1975 the UDT leadership issued a petition calling for the integration of Portuguese Timor into Indonesia.

Indonesian invasion, occupation and the Timorese resistance

20. On 28 November 1975 FRETILIN made a unilateral declaration of independence. The
following day the four other Timorese political parties met in Bali and issued a joint declaration
calling for the integration of Portuguese Timor within Indonesia. On 4 December 1975 a FRETILIN delegation left Timor-Leste to seek diplomatic and economic support for the
anticipated military confrontation with Indonesia. That delegation included José Ramos-Horta,
Mari Alkatiri and Rogerio Lobato. On 7 December Indonesia invaded Timor-Leste.
21. Dili fell quickly to the invading army. Between late 1975 and early 1978
FRETILIN/FALINTIL controlled the interior regions of the country, in which a significant part of the population sheltered. At a FRETILIN national conference that was held in mid-1976, zonas libertadas (liberated zones) and bases de apoio (resistance bases) were established. By February 1979 the last two bases de apoio, which were situated in the west of the country, fell. On 26 March 1979 the Indonesian encirclement and annihilation campaign, Operation Seroja, was discontinued.
Indonesia declared that Timor-Leste was pacified.

Reorganization of the resistance

22. By 1980 the resistance was in disarray. Xanana Gusmão, one of three surviving members
of the 1975 leadership inside Timor-Leste, was elected as both Commander-in-Chief of FALINTIL and National Political Commissar of the FRETILIN Central Committee. In the face of opposition from the hard-line FRETILIN faction, he adopted a policy of resistance based upon national unity rather than upon FRETILIN partisanship. Timorese society was encouraged to suppress internal political differences and unite against a common enemy. In December 1987 Xanana Gusmão resigned from the FRETILIN Central Committee and severed the connection between FALINTIL and FRETILIN. FALINTIL became the armed wing of the newly created National Council of Maubere Resistance (CNRM). This Council included FRETILIN, UDT and other nationalist parties. As a result, FRETILIN lost absolute control over the policies of the resistance. The resulting tensions between Xanana Gusmão and much of the FRETILIN leadership still reverberate within Timor-Leste today.
23. The 1991 massacre at Santa Cruz cemetery, in which Indonesian forces shot into a crowd
of people gathered at the funeral of a youth killed by the same forces, killing 271 persons and
injuring 362 more, both cemented the national unity basis of the resistance and hastened the rise of the civilian clandestine movement. In November 1992 Xanana Gusmão was captured and
imprisoned by the Indonesians, making him the primary political figure of the resistance.
Concurrently, the clandestine resistance movement expanded across the country and a popular
movement was re-established. On 30 August 1999, 78 per cent of the Timorese population voted for emancipation from Indonesian administration in the United Nations-sponsored Popular Consultation. In anticipation of the result, Indonesian security forces unleashed militias upon the population. Wide-scale burning and looting occurred as 1,500 people were killed and hundreds of thousands displaced.

The UNTAET interregnum, 1999-2002

24. The United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET) period was
one of great change. Party politics returned to the country for the first time since 1975. Critically, many of the 1975 political leaders assumed political prominence in the new domestic environment.
In May 2000, FRETILIN held its first major political conference in Timor-Leste in 25 years. The party withdrew from the Xanana Gusmão-led umbrella organization National Council of Timorese Resistance (CNRT), the successor to CNRM, shortly thereafter. PSD was founded in July 2000, followed by PD in mid-2001. In the August 2001 elections FRETILIN won a 57 per cent majority of the popular vote and all but one of the district seats. Ultimately, FRETILIN acquired 55 of the 88 seats in the Constituent Assembly. Significantly, support for FRETILIN was very high in the eastern districts, but much more diluted in the western districts.
25. The UNTAET period also witnessed the creation of many modern State institutions.
These include the National Parliament, the Council of Ministers, local government structures, the police service and the defence force. The current functioning of the police service, PNTL, and the Defence Force, F-FDTL, in particular, is hampered by a perceived lack of legitimacy arising from the manner of their creation. PNTL was founded with a core of Timorese who had served previously in the Indonesian police force. During 2000 FALINTIL fighters from many different regions were cantoned in Aileu. This forced cohabitation exposed long-standing political rivalries.
The faltering cohesion and discipline were manifest. In late 2000, UNTAET bowed to pressure
from Xanana Gusmão and agreed that the selection process for the new defence force would
remain an internal FALINTIL matter. This excluded the FRETILIN leadership. On 1 February
2001, FALINTIL was retired and FDTL established.
26. Between October 2001 a transitional administration was formed. All parties participated
in Government [?], with Mari Alkatiri as the Chief Minister. The Constitution of the Democratic
Republic of Timor-Leste was drafted by the FRETILIN-dominated Constituent Assembly. A
number of its sections were contentious among opposition parties. The adoption of 28 November as national independence day commemorated the 1975 unilateral declaration of independence by FRETILIN. The FRETILIN flag and anthem, Patria Patria,were adopted as the national flag and anthem. The recently formed FDTL was renamed FALINTIL-FDTL (F-FDTL) in an attempt to link the future defence force with FRETILIN history and overcome the 1987 withdrawal of FALINTIL from FRETILIN by Xanana Gusmão.
27. F-FDTL suffered a broad public backlash, particularly from the veterans’ organizations
which came into existence in 2001. Rogerio Lobato made populist appeals questioning the
legitimacy of F-FDTL to assume the mantle of FALINTIL. Veterans groups, including Colimau
2000 and Sagrada Familia, became the focal point for anti-F-FDTL rhetoric. Following the 2001
elections these groups agitated for the reconstitution of the defence force after the restoration of
independence on 20 May 2002. Rogerio Lobato was considered for but denied the position of
Secretary of State for Defence after General Taur Matan Ruak threatened to leave the defence
force. Roque Rodrigues was appointed. In the lead-up to 20 May 2002 Mr. Lobato and his
supporters organized veterans’ marches in Dili. Upon independence Rogerio Lobato was appointed Minister of Internal Administration.

Timor-Leste under the FRETILIN Government

28. Following the restoration of independence on 20 May 2002 FRETILIN assumed total
control over the Government under Prime Minister Alkatiri. While the FRETILIN administration has met many challenges inherent in nation-building, the power imbalance between it and its political opponents has been an issue since 2002 and informed the crisis of April and May 2006.
On 15 March 2005 the last major opposition party leader remaining in Parliament resigned as
Vice-President of the Parliament and quit the legislature completely.
29. The role of and demarcation between PNTL and F-FDTL within Timorese society has
also been a contentious issue since 2002. In early 2003, F-FDTL was called upon to restore public order following attacks by former militia. Rogerio Lobato, by then Minister of the Interior, supported by Prime Minister Alkatiri and the Council of Ministers called upon the United Nations to establish paramilitary police units. The subsequent establishment of the Police Reserve Unit (URP) and Border Patrol Unit (UPF) with responsibility for border patrol, cross-border militia attacks and rural counter-insurgency was not well received by either F-FDTL or opposition parties.
The Minister of the Interior stated his intention to expand URP to a full battalion and orchestrated a recruitment process wherein the majority of officers recruited for this unit came from western districts. The Government was unable to secure weapons for URP and UPF during the United Nations executive mandate. On 20 May 2004 this mandate ended. On 21 May 2004 the Government received a consignment donated by Malaysia of 180 HK33 semi-automatic assault rifles which were given to URP. In September 2004 the Government purchased 200 Steyr semiautomatic assault rifles for UPF. Sixty-six FN-FNC semi-automatic assault rifles were also purchased for the Rapid Response Unit (UIR). A further seven F2000 automatic machine guns were purchased, ostensibly for close protection purposes.
30. The record of PNTL intervention in public demonstrations is mixed. On 4 December
2002 a riot occurred in Dili in which a number of people were killed and wounded. Results of the
subsequent inquiry into the actions of PNTL have never been made public. In July 2004 UIR
officers stopped a demonstration by a veteran in front of the Government Palace. The actions of
PNTL were publicly denounced as being heavy handed and lacking in respect towards a leading
veteran of the resistance. In April 2005, PNTL successfully controlled the Catholic Church-led
demonstrations without resort to violence. The “Church demonstration” presented the FRETILIN Government with its most serious internal political challenge. The Catholic Church issued a statement claiming that the people had lost faith in the Government and sought the removal of Prime Minister Alkatiri. Members of the FRETILIN leadership told the Commission that they believe the demonstration was an attempt to topple the Government and a significant precursor to the crisis in April and May 2006.

Communal divisions within Timor-Leste

31. The current crisis has been created partially, but exacerbated significantly, by communal
factionalism. This factionalism is most commonly articulated in the perception that persons from
the east and west of Timor-Leste discriminate against each other. The Commission has heard
opposing views on the origin and longevity of this cleavage. On the one hand it is suggested that it is a totally new phenomenon, as evinced by the total absence of the issue in the thousands of
testimonies collected by the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation. On the other,
the Commission of Inquiry has been told that it is a long-dormant issue dating from the Portuguese era. Most people interviewed by the Commission agree that the east-west phenomenon was manipulated during the crisis by groups with specific political interests.
32. In the view of the Commission the east-west division is a simplification of a far more
complex issue. Timor-Leste has no modern history of concerted political violence between
easterners and westerners as unified and opposing groups. However, there are sensitive divisions within Timorese society relating to notions of national and communal identity. The poorly defined national identity, particularly in the absence of a common enemy post-1999, is critical to an understanding of how the east versus west distinction has arisen in recent years. This division infected both F-FDTL and PNTL prior to 2006, as manifested in actual or perceived acts of discrimination and nepotism. Additionally, political interests and communities have become embroiled in the issue.

The emergence of the April and May 2006 crisis

33. The first signs of the current crisis emerged with the advent of the group now known as
the petitioners and the subsequent manner in which F-FDTL managed their allegations of
discrimination within F-FDTL. A petition dated 9 January signed by 159 officers and other ranks of F-FDTL alleged mismanagement and discrimination within F-FDTL. The petitioners were drawn from almost every unit in the defence force. The petition, addressed to President Gusmão and copied to the Chief of the Defence Force and the Minister of Defence, was received by the President on 11 January 2006. As of 1 February no response had been received by the petitioners.
On 3 February the petitioners abandoned their barracks, leaving their weapons behind. They
gathered in Dili and sought an interview with the President on 7 February.
34. On 8 February 418 petitioners held a march at the Presidential Palácio das Cinzas.
Brigadier General Taur Matan Ruak refused the request of President Gusmão to attend the march and instead sent F-FDTL Chief of Staff Colonel Lere Annan Timor. The Minister of Defence attended at the invitation of the President. President Gusmão ordered the petitioners to return to the F-FDTL training centre at Metinaro and to participate in a commission of investigation which would examine the allegations raised in the petition. On 10 February the Commission was established; it comprised F-FDTL officers and two Members of Parliament. The Commission conducted its activities from 12 to 17 February. The Commission failed to resolve the problems extant between the petitioners and the F-FDTL command. On 17 February the petitioners left their barracks after being granted leave. They elected not to return.
35. In mid-March Brigadier General Ruak announced the dismissal of 594 soldiers with
retroactive effect as at 1 March. There is no evidence before the Commission of Inquiry that the
dismissal was officially executed. The Commission notes that approximately 200 of the personnel dismissed were not petitioners, but officers and other ranks who had been chronically absent without leave in the months and years prior to March 2006. On 21 March the Prime Minister expressed his support for the decision. The dismissal was not accepted by the petitioners, who announced their intention to appeal the decision to President Gusmão.
36. On 23 March the President addressed the nation on the issue. He stated that the dismissal
was within the competency of the Chief of the Defence Force, but also stated that the decision was unjust. In quoting the words of the petition, the President gave credence to the petitioners’ claims that the problems within F-FDTL were due primarily to discrimination by easterners against westerners. The Commission does not question the intention of the President, but most
interlocutors have told the Commission that his speech was perceived as being more divisive than helpful and as fostering rather than resolving communal conflict. Between 25 and 31 March
multiple disturbances in Dili assumed an east versus west dynamic as youths from both regions
became embroiled in the petitioner issue. On 3 April the petitioners moved to the place known as the Carantina in Taci Tolu. On 17 April the petitioners commenced preparations for a five-day protest.

.

Relatório da CI - I.Introduction

I. A. Establishment of the Commission

1. On 8 June 2006, the Senior Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation of Timor-Leste wrote to the Secretary-General of the United Nations inviting the United Nations to “establish an independent special inquiry commission” to “review the incidents on 28 and 29 April and on 23, 24 and 25 May, and other related events or issues which contributed to the crisis”.
2. The Secretary-General responded favourably to the invitation. On 12 June 2006, he
requested the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to establish such a
commission. His decision was communicated to the Security Council on 13 June 2006 (see S/PV.5457). On 20 June 2006, the Security Council, in resolution 1690 (2006), welcomed the initiative of the Secretary-General to ask the High Commissioner for Human Rights to establish an independent special commission of inquiry and requested the Secretary-General to keep the Council informed on the subject matter.
3. On 27 June 2006, the Secretary-General wrote to the President of Timor-Leste, Xanana Gusmão, informing him that he had requested the High Commissioner for Human Rights to establish an Independent Special Commission of Inquiry “to review the incidents on 28-29 April and 23, 24 and 25 May and other related events or issues which contributed to the recent crisis” (“the Commission”). The Secretary-General also informed the President that he had appointed three commissioners who would convene in Timor-Leste for a maximum total of five weeks over a maximum of two visits, and who would be supported by a secretariat based in Dili. The Secretary-General attached to his letter the terms of reference for the Commission.

B. Terms of reference

4. The terms of reference set out the mandate of the Commission as follows:
“ (a) To establish the facts and circumstances relevant to incidents on 28 and 29 April, 23, 24 and 25 May and related events or issues that contributed to the crisis, including issues related to the functioning of the security sector;
“(b) To clarify responsibility for the above-mentioned events;
“(c) To recommend measures to ensure accountability for crimes and serious violations of human rights allegedly committed during the above-mentioned period, taking into account that the Government of Timor-Leste considers that the domestic justice system, which has the participation of international judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers, should be the primary avenue of accountability for these alleged crimes and violations;
“(d) To report its findings within three months of its establishment through the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to the Secretary-General and the National Parliament of Timor-Leste.”
5. The terms of reference make clear that the Commission would enjoy the full cooperation of the Government of Timor-Leste and would be provided with the necessary facilities to enable it to discharge its mandate. In particular, the Commission was to be guaranteed:
(a) Freedom of movement throughout the territory of Timor-Leste, including facilities of transport;
(b) Unhindered access to all places and establishments, and freedom to meet and interview representatives of governmental and local authorities, military authorities, community leaders, non-governmental organizations and other institutions, and any such person whose testimony was considered necessary for the fulfilment of its mandate;
(c) Free access to all sources of information, including documentary material and physical evidence;
(d) Appropriate security arrangements for the personnel and documents of the Commission;
(e) Protection of victims and witnesses and all those who were in contact with the
Commission in connection with the inquiry, including the assurance that no such person
would, as a result of such contact, suffer harassment, threats, acts of intimidation, illtreatment or reprisals;
(f) Privileges, immunities and facilities necessary for the independent conduct of the
inquiry. In particular, the Commissioners and staff would enjoy the privileges and
immunities accorded to experts on missions and officials under the Convention on the
Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.

C. Composition of the Commission

6. The Commission is composed of three members: Mr. Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro (Brazil,
Chairperson), Ms. Zelda Holtzman (South Africa) and Mr. Ralph Zacklin (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), supported by a secretariat headed by an Executive Director, Mr. Luc Côté (Canada). The Commissioners were appointed by the Secretary-General upon the recommendation of the High Commissioner for Human Rights based on their expertise, integrity and independence. They were selected for their expertise in:
• Investigating serious human rights violations;
• Investigating crimes;
• Security sector reform.

7. The secretariat was established and assisted by the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and located in the former United Nations House, Rua de Caicoli, Dili, Timor-Leste. The secretariat consisted of criminal investigators, human rights monitors, legal advisers, a political adviser, an expert in military sector reform, an expert in police sector reform, a data-management officer, security officers and other administrative support staff.
The secretariat was headed by an Executive Director assisted by an executive assistant, who both arrived in Dili with a few other staff members on 7 July 2006, marking the official beginning of the work of the Commission.

D. Working methods

8. The Commissioners met with the Executive Director and some members of the secretariat in Geneva from 3 to 5 July 2006 to develop a common understanding of the terms of the mandate and discuss relevant issues. These included the working methods of the Commission as well as the timetable of the visits of the Commissioners to Timor-Leste. The Commissioners and the Executive Director also had meetings with a number of officials at OHCHR, including the High Commissioner. Further, the Commissioners met with representatives of the Governments of Australia, Brazil, China, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, Thailand, the United Kingdom and the United States of America and of the European
Union.

9. The Commissioners agreed that the first component of the mandate - “to establish the facts and circumstances relevant to incidents on 28 and 29 April and 23, 24 and 25 May and related events or issues that contributed to the crisis” - meant that the Commission must act as a factfinding body. The first step was to gather and assess the information contained in the various reports and documents made by other investigative bodies. Those bodies included: the Prosecutor General of Timor–Leste; the Armed Forces, or FALINTIL - Forças Armadas de Defesa de Timor- Leste (F-FDTL); Policia Nacional de Timor-Leste (the National Police) (PNTL); other government bodies of Timor-Leste, United Nations bodies, the Australian Federal Police and Armed Forces;
other law enforcement agencies present in Timor-Leste (Malaysia, New Zealand and Portugal); other intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Other background materials were also to be collected and analysed in order to identify issues that contributed to the crisis. The Commission would then verify the veracity of the information in these materials and reports, as well as establish further facts, by interviewing witnesses, officials and other persons occupying positions of authority, as well as persons in police custody or detained in prison, and by visiting places where crimes were reportedly perpetrated or other incidents took place. This process would allow the Commission to establish a clear narrative of the incidents that unfolded in April and May 2006.
10. As far as “issues related to the functioning of the security sector” are concerned, the
Commissioners agreed that it was important to analyse the dysfunctions in the operations of both F-FDTL and PNTL during the crisis in order to understand the apparent collapse of the security sector. Although it was understood that the mandate of the Commission did not extend to the making of recommendations as to the global reform of the security sector, any dysfunction within the two organs of the security sector relevant to institutional responsibility for the events of April and May clearly did fall within the mandate.
11. The Commissioners understood the second component of the mandate, “to clarify
responsibility for the above-mentioned events”, as involving both individual and institutional responsibility. To clarify individual responsibility “for crimes and serious violations of human rights allegedly committed during the above-mentioned period”, the Commission had to collect a reliable body of material that indicated which individuals might be responsible for the crimes committed. The Commission was not endowed with the powers of a court or a prosecutor. In particular, the Commission lacked the coercive powers of subpoena, search and seizure, and warrants. Its powers were therefore limited to recommending that some individuals be prosecuted
under domestic criminal law and/or be held accountable under any existing institutional
mechanisms of a disciplinary nature.
12. In this regard, an issue arose with respect to the standard of proof that the Commission would apply in its investigations. In view of the limitations inherent in its powers, the Commission decided that it could not comply with the normal criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. 1 Rather, the Commission concluded that the most appropriate standard was that of reasonable suspicion. This would necessitate a reliable body of material consistent with other verified circumstances tending to show that a person may reasonably be suspected of involvement in the commission of a crime. Obviously the Commission would not make final judgements as to criminal guilt. It would make an assessment of possible suspects in preparation for future investigations and possible indictments by a prosecutor.
13. The Commissioners decided that in order to recommend “measures to ensure accountability
for crimes and serious violations of human rights allegedly committed during the above-mentioned period, taking into account that the Government of Timor-Leste considers that the domestic justice system, which has the participation of international judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers, should be the primary avenue of accountability for these alleged crimes and violations”, they would need to make a preliminary assessment of the existing Timor-Leste domestic justice system.
In particular, issues of the capacity and independence of and the level of competency within the justice system would need to be examined in order to determine whether that system could deal appropriately and in a timely manner with the recommendations of the Commission.
14. The Commission conducted its work in an impartial and independent manner in accordance with international standards. These principles have governed the working methods of the Commission in its interaction with Governments, international organizations, NGOs and individuals.

E. The visits of the Commissioners to Timor-Leste

15. The Commissioners made their first visit to Timor-Leste from 4 to 11 August 2006. The Commissioners had meetings with the President of Timor-Leste, the Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, the Prosecutor General, the Bishop of Dili, the office of the 1 Article 114 (1) of the República Democrática de Timor-Leste Criminal Procedure Code states that there is no burden of proof upon the defendant in a criminal case. Article 114 (2) states that it is incumbent upon the prosecutor to sustain the indictment in trial and the court may order, either on a discretionary basis or at request, that any evidence the knowledge of which is deemed necessary to uncover the truth and to make a proper decision on the case be produced,
namely in respect of civil liability. While there is no express statement of the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt, article 278 enumerates a list of factors to be considered in the decision-making process. This implies a consideration of proven facts on the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt, as consistent with international
criminal and human rights law.
Provedor for Human Rights and Justice (Ombudsman), the Chief of F-FDTL, the Chief
Commissioner of PNTL, the former Prime Minister, the Former Defence Minister, the leaders of the main political parties Frente Revolucionária do Timor-Leste Independente (Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor) (FRETILIN), Partido Democrático (Democratic Party) (PD), Partido Social Democrático (Social Democratic Party) (PSD), Associação Social Democrata Timorense (Social Democratic Association of Timor-Leste) (ASDT), the Special Representative of the Secretary-General and other United Nations representatives from different agencies, representatives of the diplomatic community, representatives of the petitioners, former members of the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation and both an international prosecutor and a judge working in the domestic judicial sector. The Commissioners also visited places where crimes were alleged to have been committed.
16. The second visit of the Commissioners to Timor-Leste took place from 4 to 15 September 2006. The Commissioners had meetings with the President of Timor-Leste, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice, the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, the Chief of F-FDTL, the General Commander of PNTL, the former Prime Minister, the former Minister of the Interior, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, representatives from the United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT) transition team, numerous NGOs and a leader of an armed group in Liquiça. The Commissioners visited the Judicial Training Centre and attended a hearing at the Dili District Court. Numerous working sessions were held with members of the secretariat in
order to prepare the final draft of the report.

F. Cooperation of civil and military authorities of Timor-Leste, other concerned
Governments, the United Nations, non-governmental organizations and other
representatives of civil society

17. The Commission acknowledges the excellent cooperation of the authorities of Timor-Leste, both civilian and military, the diplomatic community, the United Nations Office in Timor-Leste (UNOTIL), UNMIT, other agencies of the United Nations and NGOs. The Commission had access to all individuals and all places it required. The Commission also received numerous documents requested from all the organizations mentioned. More than 200 interviews were conducted by the secretariat and more than 1,000 documents were received. Finally, the Commission expresses its gratitude to all individuals from both Timor-Leste and abroad who agreed to be interviewed by its members or to provide documents.

.

Relatório da CI - site do Alto Comissariado das Nações Unidas para os Direitos Humanos

http://www.ohchr.org

Independent Special Commission of Inquiry for Timor Leste

Geneva, 17 October 2006 -- Today the UN Independent Special Commission of Inquiry for Timor-Leste submitted its report to the National Parliament of Timor-Leste according to its mandate. A copy of the report was provided to each member of the National Parliament, the Prime Minister and the President of Timor-Leste.
>>> Full summary

Other versions: Bahasa Portuguese Tetum

.

Report of the United Nations - 1

Independent Special Commission of Inquiry for Timor-Leste
Geneva, 2 October 2006
Summary
The Independent Special Commission of Inquiry for Timor-Leste was established under the
auspices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights following an invitation from
the then Minister for Foreign Affairs of Timor-Leste to the Secretary-General to establish such a
body. Its mandate was to establish the facts and circumstances relevant to incidents that took place
on 28 and 29 April and 23, 24 and 25 May and related events or issues that contributed to the
crisis, clarify responsibility for those events and recommend measures of accountability for crimes
and serious violations of human rights allegedly committed during the mandated period.
The present report is based upon extensive interviews and analysis conducted by the
Commission in Timor-Leste. In excess of 200 witnesses were interviewed and 2,000 documents
were considered by the Commission. The Commission has been able to establish a detailed and
accurate narrative of the events of April and May which resulted in significant loss of life, injury
and widespread property damage.
Further to that narrative of events and circumstances, the Commission has established the
responsibility of various actors and institutions. While recognizing that Timor-Leste is a fledgling
democracy with developing institutions, it is the view of the Commission that the crisis which
occurred in Timor-Leste can be explained largely by the frailty of State institutions and the
weakness of the rule of law. Governance structures and existing chains of command broke down or
were bypassed; roles and responsibilities became blurred; solutions were sought outside the
existing legal framework. The Commission has examined exhaustively the responsibility of the
relevant security institutions, organs of Government and international institutions and made
findings as to the acts and omissions of these bodies which contributed materially to the events.
The mandate for clarifying responsibility for the events of April and May also includes
establishing individual criminal responsibility. The Commission is neither a tribunal nor a
prosecuting authority. It makes no conclusions about the guilt beyond reasonable doubt of specific
persons. Rather, it identifies individuals reasonably suspected of participation in serious criminal
activity and recommends that these people be prosecuted under the domestic law. Persons holding
public office and senior appointments within the security sector are among such individuals
identified. The Commission also identifies other persons with respect to whom further
investigation by the competent authorities may lead to criminal prosecution.
In accordance with its mandate the Commission has made recommendations regarding
measures of accountability to be accomplished through the national judicial system. This system
must be reinforced considerably. It is vital to Timor-Leste that justice be done and seen to be done.
A culture of impunity will threaten the foundations of the State. The Commission is of the view
that justice, peace and democracy are mutually reinforcing imperatives. If peace and democracy
are to be advanced, justice must be effective and visible. This will require a substantial and longterm
effort on the part of the Government and its international partners.


List of abbreviations
ASDT Associação Social Democráta Timorense (Social Democratic Association of
Timor- Leste)
CNRM Conselho Nacional de Resistência Maubere (National Council of Maubere
Resistance)
FALINTIL Forças Armadas de Libertação Nacional de Timor-Leste (Armed Forces for the
National Liberation of East Timor)
F-FDTL FALINTIL - Forças Armadas de Defesa de Timor-Leste
FRETILIN Frente Revolucionária do Timor-Leste Independente (Revolutionary Front for an
Independent East Timor)
IDP internally displaced person
NGO non-governmental organization
PD Partido Democrático
PKF United Nations Peacekeeping Force
PNTL Polícia Nacional de Timor-Leste
PSD Partido Social Democrático (Social Democratic Party)
UDT União Democrática Timorense (Timorese Democratic Union) [¿
UIR Unidade Intervenção Rápida (Rapid Response Unit)
UNMIT United Nations Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste
UNOTIL United Nations Office in Timor-Leste
UNPOL United Nations Police
UNTAET United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor
UPF Unidade Patrulhamento Fronteira (Border Patrol Unit)
URP Unidade de Reserva da Polícia (Police Reserve Unit)

Chronology of significant events
9 January 2006 Forças Armadas de Libertação National de Timor-
Leste/FALINTIL - Força de Defesa de Timor-Leste (F-FDTL)
soldiers submit a written petition to Brigadier General Taur
Matan Ruak and President Gusmão.
17 February 2006 The petitioners abandon their barracks.
16 March 2006 The dismissal of 591 petitioners is announced. The effective
date is 1 March 2006.
23 March 2006 The President makes a speech criticizing the decision to
dismiss and referring to the “east versus west” issue.
18 April 2006 The petitioners submit a letter to the General Commander of
the Políicia Nacional de Timor-Leste (PNTL), seeking
permission to hold a peaceful demonstration from 24 to 28
April inclusive.
24 April 2006 The petitioners’ demonstration begins in front of the
Government Palace.
28 April 2006 Violence erupts outside the Government Palace on the last
morning of the demonstration. Two civilians are killed, four
persons suffer firearm injuries, two persons suffer other
serious injuries.
More violence occurs at Comoro Market. One civilian is
killed, eight persons suffer firearm injuries, four persons
suffer other serious injuries.
At Raikotu/Taci Tolu violence occurs within the F-FDTL
operational area. Two civilians are killed, five civilians suffer
firearm injuries.
F-FDTL is deployed to assist PNTL to restore order and
contain the petitioners.
29 April 2006 The decision is made to withdraw F-FDTL.
1 May 2006 Joint F-FDTL Military Police and PNTL operations
commence.
3 May 2006 Major Alfredo Reinado abandons the F-FDTL Military Police
taking with him other military police officers, PNTL officers
and weapons.
4 May 2006 The withdrawal of F-FDTL is completed.
8 May 2006 Incident of violence in Gleno in which eastern PNTL officers
are attacked. One officer killed, one officer seriously injured.
Minister of the Interior Rogerio Lobato arms two groups of
civilians - the Rai Los and Lima Lima groups - with weapons
and ammunition belonging to the Border Patrol Unit (UPF) of
PNTL.
17- 19 May 2006 The Frente Revolucionária do Timor-Leste Independente
(Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor)
(FRETILIN) Party National Congress held in Dili.
21 May 2006 Minister of the Interior Lobato distributes additional UPF
weapons to the Rai Los group.
23 May 2006 F-FDTL and PNTL officers are ambushed by Major Reinado
and his group. Five persons are killed, 10 persons are
seriously injured.
24 May 2006 Attack on F-FDTL soldiers in Taci Tolu/Tibar by the Rai Los
group, petitioners, and PNTL. Five persons are killed two
persons are seriously injured.
Attack on the house of Brigadier General Taur Matan Ruak.
One person is killed, two persons are injured.
F-FDTL arms civilians with the knowledge of Minister of
Defence Rodrigues.
25 May 2006 The house of in-laws of Minister of the Interior Lobato is
burnt. Six civilians trapped inside the house are killed.
An armed confrontation between F-FDTL soldiers and PNTL
officers centred on the PNTL headquarters is followed by the
shooting of unarmed PNTL officers escorted under United
Nations protection. Nine persons are killed, twenty-seven
persons suffer serious gunshot injuries.
A shooting occurs at Mercado Lama. One civilian is killed,
two civilians are wounded.
1 June 2006 Minister of the Interior Lobato and Minister of Defence
Rodrigues resign.
25 June 2006 Minister for Foreign Affairs Ramos-Horta resigns.
26 June 2006 Prime Minister Alkatiri resigns.
10 July 2006 José Ramos-Horta is sworn in as Prime Minister.

Contents
Paragraphs
I. Introduction............................................................................................. 1 – 17
A. Establishment of the Commission…………………………..…..… 1 - 3
B. Terms of reference…………………………………………………. 4 - 5
C. Composition of the Commission……………………………………. 6 - 7
D. Working methods………………………………………………..… 8 - 14
E. The visits of the Commissioners to Timor-Leste…………………... 15 - 16
F. Cooperation of civil and military authorities of Timor-Leste,
other concerned Governments, the United Nations,
non-governmental organizations and other representatives of civil
society…………………………….…………………………………… 17
II. Background to the crisis of April and May 2006 ....................................18 - 36
III. The facts and circumstances relevant to events of April and
May 2006..................................................................................... 37 – 101
IV. Responsibility………………………………………………………… 102 - 173
A. Legal background..............................................................................102 - 108
B. Individual criminal responsibility......................................................109 - 134
C. Institutional responsibility................................................................ 135 – 173
V. Accountability measures.........................................................................174 - 219
A. Existing judicial mechanisms............................................................ 176 - 203
B. Augmenting international support…………………………………. 204 - 211
C. Use of traditional justice reconciliation processes………………….212 - 213
D. Other measures of accountability…………………………………...214 – 220
VI. Conclusion and findings................................................................................221 - 224
A. Conclusions…………………………………………………………221 - 223
B. Findings………………………………………………………………... 224
VII. Recommendations........................................................................................225 - 245
A. Individual criminal responsibility…………………………………..225 - 227B.

Accountability measures……………………………………………………228 - 245

.