{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02197802197802198, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009555661729574774, 'mean_word_length': 5.307228915662651, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Justice in Guatemala

IANUARY 26 MARKED A WATERSHED IN GUATEMALAN HIStory That evening, after more than eight hours of arguments from prosecutors and defense lawyers, retired army general Efrain Ríos Montt—the military leader who presided over the most intense and bloody period of state repression in the country's modem history— was formally charged by Judge Carol Patricia Flores with genocide and crimes against humanity Ríos Montt now faces the real possibility of a criminal trial. Inside the courtroom on the 15th floor of the Tribunal Tower in Guatemala City, the verdict was met with the mechanical gasp of a dozen camera shutters clicking simultaneously Downstairs, in the plaza outside the building, hundreds of massacre survivors and families of victims were watching the proceedings on open-air screens. They cheered, applauded, and wept at the astonishing news. The criminal acts at the heart of the indictment took place 30 years ago, in 1982-83, when Ríos Montt's armed forces unleashed a savage counterinsurgency campaign that massacred thousands of unarmed Mayan civilians in the country's northwestem department of Quiche. Investigations into his regime's scorched-earth operations prompted the Historical Clarification Commission (CEH)—Guatemala's truth commission—to declare in 1999 that "acts of genocide" had taken place in the Quiche's Ixil region and other areas during the 36-year internal conflict. The finding opened the door to the possible prosecution of senior army officers and their commander in chief. But for years. Ríos Montt avoided facing charges, thanks to judicial inaction, elite complicity, and political immunity, frustrating efforts by human rights lawyers representing the affected communities to mount a legal case. The ruling on January 26 changed everything. In her decision, Flores discounted the defense posed by Ríos Montt's legal team that civilian deaths took place in the heat of battle through the errors of field commanders, rather than as a result of govemment policy In particular, she rejected the argument of Ríos Montt's lawyer Gon-