President Nayib Bukele has stepped forward to defend the ongoing mass trials of gang members in El Salvador, directly challenging criticisms from international media outlets like Reuters. The controversy arose after reports labeled defendants as «alleged gang members,» a term the Salvadoran administration disputes given the overwhelming physical evidence, such as gang-specific facial tattoos.
Responding to concerns over the judicial process, Bukele argued that the current legal challenges facing the nation require a departure from outdated systems that no longer serve the modern social contract.
Central to the president’s defense is the application of «command responsibility,» a recognized doctrine in international law. Bukele noted that the prosecution of criminal leadership for the collective actions of their subordinates is not a local invention but a established legal tool. These “mass trials” and the prosecution of the leadership of criminal organizations for the crimes committed by their members are not a legal innovation; they are a recognized doctrine in international law, Bukele stated. He pointedly compared this approach to the Nuremberg Trials, where Allied powers held high-ranking officials accountable for the atrocities committed under their command.
The president further elaborated on the necessity of evolving legal frameworks, suggesting that systems designed for post-WWII Europe are not universally applicable to every society today. He emphasized that legal systems must respond to the specific needs and shifting social contracts of the people they protect. The old legal system worked very well, but only in the Europe that existed between the end of WW2 and COVID-19. It doesn’t work anymore, he remarked, highlighting his view that El Salvador must forge a path that ensures domestic security over rigid adherence to foreign legal traditions.
By invoking the Nuremberg precedent, the Salvadoran government aims to provide a sophisticated legal justification for the large-scale proceedings taking place at the CECOT mega-prison. This strategy focuses on the hierarchy of the MS-13 and other structures, asserting that the leaders who issued orders are just as culpable as those who carried them out. For an American audience, this comparison draws a line between the fight against domestic terrorism in El Salvador and the historic pursuit of justice against organized war crimes in the 20th century.
As the virtual trials continue with hundreds of inmates appearing via screens, the administration remains firm in its stance that the visual and testimonial evidence justifies the mass nature of the proceedings. The focus remains on dismantling the leadership of these organizations entirely. By utilizing international doctrines like command responsibility, El Salvador seeks to validate its judicial methods on the global stage, arguing that extraordinary criminal threats require equally robust and historically grounded legal responses.