:: CURRENT AFFAIRS
Chiapas: a reactivation of a state of social conflict
At the beginning of October, the Network for Peace (conformed by 17 Chiapas-based organizations) denounced the violent atmosphere, which has characterized the situation in Chiapas over recent months. While several political actors and the local papers focused on the elections, an increasing number of situations involving harassment, violence and evictions passed almost unnoticed, apparently considered to be isolated incidents.
Elections: The tip of the iceberg
On October 7, elections were held in Chiapas. In dispute were 118 municipal presidencies (mayoralties) and 40 local deputies. Before the elections, the Chiapas Electoral Commission had received 43 complaints of presumed electoral crimes, the majority being premature political campaigning, destruction of advertising material, buying and forcing voting, diversion of public funds to campaigns and the participation of civil servants in support of certain candidates.
The day of the elections were marred by a series of violent incidents in Pueblo Solistahuacán, Venustiano Carranza, Simojovel and Comitán, among other locations. The bulk of the media, electoral authorities and the Government itself opted to minimize these incidents. Once the results were released, protests were announced in a dozen municipalities.
According to official figures, the highest voter participation in the history of the State’s elections was registered at the ballot-boxes, with 57.17% of voters participating. The Institutional Revolution Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, PRI) won 52 of the 118 councils in Chiapas, the Democratic Revolution Party (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, PRD) was left with 31, while the National Action Party (Partido Acción Nacional, PAN) will administer 23 councils, according to statistics provided by the State Electoral Institute (Instituto Estatal Electoral, IEE). In addition, of the 40 deputy positions contested, the PRI won 14, the PRD 10, the PAN 7, the Mexican Greens (Partido Verde Ecologista de México, PVEM) 3, the New Alliance Party (Partido Nueva Alianza) 2, the Workers’ Party (Partido del Trabajo, PT) 2 and Convergence (Convergencia) 2.
Given the imposition, decomposition and recomposition of the political parties and grassroots organizations which participated in the electoral process, it may be difficult to interpret these results. One of the worrying factors is related to the political timeline of certain winning candidates, independent of which parties they currently represent. Paradoxically, the gains of the PRD are considered by some analysts to represent a return of the old PRI. The Zapatista National Liberation Army Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, EZLN), speaking through Subcomandante Marcos, denounced: “With Sabines and the PRD, the landholders have returned […] The same ones who said that the life of an Indian was worth the same as a chicken’s.”
Photo: Elections in the Northern Zone of Chiapas (© SIPAZ)
Increase in conflicts, particularly agrarian ones
Before listing a series of aggressions and intimidations, the previously cited communiqué of the Network for Peace alerted: “Beyond the electoral context, during the first nine months of the Federal Government of Felipe Calderón and the State Government of Juan Sabines Guerrero, indigenous territories in Chiapas, particularly areas of Zapatista influence, have suffered a new offensive. This repressive strategy has included actions organized jointly between the approximately 80 permanent military encampments, local authorities, agrarian institutions and groups identified as paramilitaries who hide behind the acronyms of peasant farmer (campesino) organizations.”
According to the Center for Political Analysis and Social and Economic Research (Centro de Análisis Político e Investigaciones Sociales y Económicas, CAPISE), thousands of families are at risk of being evacuated from their lands, which would be “the most brutal attack to be seen in the last nine years”, and result in a “mass, systematic and a priori legal” land plundering. According to their analysis, the main objective is to remove all of the land “recovered” by the Zapatistas after the armed uprising of 1994.
In October, the EZLN denounced that there has been an increase in military and paramilitary harassment since the government of Juan Sabines came to power. In September, the group Las Abejas in the municipality of Chenalhó (location of the 1997 Massacre of Acteal) became another group to denounce the increasing paramilitary and governmental offensive: “The well-known low-intensity war against the communities who fight against the neoliberal system doesn’t seem to have ended with the departure of the PRI governments.”
Additionally, since the beginning of the year, the Federal Electricity Commission (Comisión Federal de Electricidad, CFE), accompanied by the State’s Sectorial Police, has been conducting major electricity cuts, which have provoked confrontations in various communities. It is worthy of note that more than 350,000 residents in Chiapas refuse to pay their electricity bills as they consider them too high.
Another conflict highlighted concerns that have been developing over several years about the Biosphere Reserve in Montes Azules. On Saturday August 18, a simultaneous police and military operative moved to evict the communities of Buen Samaritano and San Manuel in the municipality of Ocosingo. A total of 6 families (39 people) were evicted. Six men were detained for the crimes of plunder and ecocide before being freed some five weeks after legal proceedings were halted. Five other unofficial settlements are at risk of eviction. The environmental organization Woods of the People of the Southeast (Maderas del Pueblo del Sureste) informed that the violent eviction operations in the communities of Montes Azules had yet to end and that “they form part of a global strategy of clearing territories rich in biodiversity, forest cover and sources of unpolluted water, both in Mexico and Mesoamerica.”

Displaced families from Montes Azules (© SIPAZ)
NATIONAL SITUATION
The Network for Peace, in their October communiqué, also emphasized: “Nor are we able to understand these facts without taking into account what is happening in the national context, where we see widespread military deployment, and a tendency to repress grassroots organizational processes.”
A division which remains unhealed
On September 1, President Felipe Calderón delivered his first governmental report while surrounded by a strong police presence. In a ceremony which lasted less than five minutes, Calderón delivered his report to more than 100 empty seats, as the legislators from the left chose to leave Congress to highlight the fact that they don’t recognize Calderón as president as he achieved his position through electoral fraud. In large measure, Mexico remains divided by the close victory which the Electoral Tribunal of the Judicial Power of Federation (Tribunal Electoral del Poder Judicial de la Federación, TEPJF) granted Calderón, whose government faces a national resistance movement led by the former left-wing presidential candidate, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
In terms of the report itself, the President promised to continue to fight poverty and create employment, as well as fighting drug-trafficking and organized crime. In response to the questions which have been raised, Calderón highlighted the serious repercussions of the economic slowdown for Mexicans. Examples are the increase in the price of tortillas and other basic food products, as well as the increase in the cost of petrol. Nor has there been a significant increase in the level of employment, which has resulted in increased migration to the United States, despite the construction of the US-Mexico Border Fence and the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans trying to cross it. It is worth noting that, according to data from the World Bank, just over half of the 104 million Mexican citizens are considered to be living in poverty (with 24% living in extreme poverty).
Additionally, the fact that Felipe Calderón has placed the institutional stability of the government in the hands of the Army has been strongly questioned. Despite his report’s emphasizing that “this Government, as never before, has used all the strength of the Army to recover the spaces co-opted by drug-trafficking groups and other criminal organizations”, the major “antinarco” operatives have not yet had the desired results. Finally, selective repression of grassroots movements has also been denounced.
Another incident occurred in September, during the commemoration of the Independence of Mexico, which bears witness to the continuing political and social rift resulting from the 2006 presidential elections. On the eve of the celebration, the Main Square of Mexico City, protected by members of the Federal Preventative Police (Policía Federal Preventiva, PFP), was disputed by supporters of former presidential candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador, to the motto “The cry of the free”, and the organizers of the official ceremony. López Obrador himself led the ceremony of the Cry of Independence in San José Tenango, in the municipality of Oaxaca.

Independence Day in the Zócalo of Mexico City
(© Noé Pineda Arredondo)
Electoral reform: An opportunity to overcome polarization?
In September the Senate approved an electoral reform which reduces the costs of campaigns and elections, bans political parties and third parties from buying advertising time in the electronic media, limits the “dirty war” during the campaign period and the promotions of civil servants, while giving greater sanctioning powers to electoral officials. Many aspects of this reform are directly linked to the denunciations, which were made in the aftermath of the 2006 presidential elections.
In another positive move, the electoral reforms delimit the growing political power of the television consortiums; in addition to the money, which they will no longer receive from these advertising campaigns, their capacity to “influence” will be greatly reduced in the electoral process. A point to bear in mind is that in the last elections, political parties spent nearly 70% of their State-allocated campaign funds on buying radio and television time.
On September 11, in an unprecedented meeting between politicians and media representatives, a television announcer stated to television cameras and microphones that professional politicians were seen as having a lower level of credibility than the television companies. The National Chamber of the Radio and Television Industry rejected the reform, arguing that some of its clauses limited freedom of expression.
In any case, the removal of the President of the Federal Electoral Institute and the electoral reform could contribute to overcoming or reducing the polarization, which remains from the last presidential elections. On the other hand, in the discussion of this reform and in other aspects of political life (including internal elections in the PRD), it would seem to strengthen the moderate and institutional wing of the PRD itself, to the detriment of its so-called “confrontational” side centered around the figure of López Obrador.
During the period covered by this report, a fiscal reform was also approved. Despite being much weaker than the bill drafted by the Executive, this reform improved the image of Felipe Calderón as he can now, compared to former President Vicente Fox, achieve reforms with the approval of Congress. However, in September, the Chamber of Senators rejected the legal reform suggested by the Executive, which granted powers to the police to intercept telephone lines, carry out searches or detain alleged criminals without a warrant. The legislators argued that Mexico lacked sufficiently trained and trustworthy personnel within the public forces to guarantee the maintenance of human rights norms during the application of these laws.
Mexico: “Schizophrenic” human rights policy

Irene Khan, General Secretary of Amnesty International
During her visit to Mexico in March, Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International (AI), stated that the Mexican Government had a “schizophrenic policy” with regards to the defense and promotion of human rights. “Mexico is one of the strongest promoters of fundamental rights abroad, but here at home we find serious violations of these guarantees,” Khan said. She affirmed the existence of systemic failures of the Mexican justice system, perpetuating impunity, a “cancer with long roots”. She continued, “The President recognizes that the system has problems, but he recognizes it from the perspective of crime and not from the failures in human rights.” She finally warned, “This administration is interested in promoting reform, but it hasn’t been clear about the position that it will take with regards to human rights.” Both, Ulises Ruiz, Governor of Oaxaca, and Francisco Ramírez Acuña, Government Secretary, questioned AI about the sources they used to reach the conclusions in the Mexico report.
The National Human Rights Commission (Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos, CNDH) continues to demand that the Army be removed from the fight against drug trafficking because of the potential risk of human rights violations. In August, the newspaper The Washington Post confirmed that the Governments of Mexico and the United States were close to sealing a broad agreement in anti-drug cooperation, which would represent “the most important alliance of its kind since the inception of Plan Colombia”. It would include telephone interception equipment, radars to trace drug shipments, planes to transport Mexican agents, as well as several training programs. Although the details of a bilateral agreement of this kind have yet to be revealed, as a result of doubts raised with regard to Plan Colombia it is feared that this option could imply restrictions of basic human rights.
THE OTHER CAMPAIGN AND OTHER SOCIAL MOVEMENTS
The Other Campaign
On September 24, the EZLN decided to suspend the tour of Zapatista commanders, originally planning to travel to the southern and central areas of Mexico between September and December. The decision was made as a result of what has been considered an offensive against Zapatista communities, undertaken by the Government via military, paramilitary, legal, agrarian and environmental channels. Another factor was related to the multifaceted campaign of the Popular Revolutionary Army (Ejército Popular Revolucionario, EPR) “with the just and legitimate demand to recover their disappeared colleagues”. According to the EZLN, “we can’t ask the EPR to declare a truce merely to allow our delegation to pass through territory where they are present or have influence.”
Following this, the EPR absolved the EZLN of responsibility in any actions which may occur in coming days as part of their campaign to demand the handover of two of their militants, disappeared in Oaxaca since May 2007. PEMEX (Mexican Petroleum) has given a tally of more than 3,000 million pesos of damage caused by the September attacks on the gas pipelines in Veracruz and Tlaxcala, for which the EPR has claimed responsibility. The Attorney General of Mexico, Eduardo Medina Mora, assured the public that the EPR is a weakened organization and classed their actions as terrorism and sabotage, rather than social struggle. The EPR responded by affirming that the true “terrorists” are in the Government, the police and the oligarchy which rules Mexico. “There are those who condemn and disqualify our actions in self-defense by labeling us as delinquents and terrorists, but they remain silent before State terrorism and the acts of the far right.”

Encounter of the Peoples of America, Vicam, Sonora - © SIPAZ
Between October 11 and 14, in the Yaqui community of Vícam (Sonora), the Meeting of the Indigenous Peoples of America was held, called by the traditional Yaqui authorities, the National Indigenous Congress (Congreso Nacional Indígena, CNI) and the Sixth Commission of the EZLN. Initially it was uncertain whether the Meeting could be held, as the organizing committee denounced the fact that there had been both an attempted boycott by Yaqui authorities aligned with the Government, and police and military harassment. A week before the event, the Zapatista delegation was detained at a Mazatlán, Sinaloa, checkpoint by military and legal agents. Subsequently, the Zapatista commanders returned to Chiapas, leaving Subcomandante Marcos as the Meeting’s only EZLN representative. Some delegations participating in the event also denounced that police and/or soldiers who intercepted them on their way to Sonora confiscated their food supplies and treated them with overt hostility. On the outskirts of Vícam, surveillance by the Federal Preventative Police and the Sonora State Police was maintained throughout the event.
Some 570 indigenous delegates from 12 American nations attended the Meeting, representing 66 indigenous peoples. Juan Chávez, Purepecha representative and member of the CNI, said at the beginning of the event: “Holding this event, on these lands, is in itself a message of rebellion from our peoples, in defense of Mother Earth and against ecocidal, ethnocidal and genocidal capitalism. This capitalism tries to evict us from our lands, inhabited by the first representatives of the nations, peoples and tribes of America and the world.”
In October, more than 100 groups which form the National Front Against Repression (Frente Nacional Contra la Represión), highlighted what they term as a new stage of a dirty war against social justice activists in the hope of avoiding “another bloodbath caused by the State’s repressive apparatus”. The participants considered this a repetition of a 70s’-style pattern of clandestine torture, persecution and disappearances conducted against those who demanded political and economic change.

:: FOCUS
Oaxaca, an unresolved conflict
On June 14, 2006, a blockade of Section 22 of the National Union of Education Workers (Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación, SNTE), occupying the center of the City of Oaxaca, was violently repressed by public security forces. As a result of this incident, combined with growing public dissatisfaction, widespread protests exploded across the State of Oaxaca, led by the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Oaxaca, APPO), demanding the resignation of State Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz.
On October 27 2006, following a violent confrontation, the Federal Government authorized the dispatch of more than 4,500 representatives of the Federal Preventative Police (Policía Federal Preventiva, PFP) to the City of Oaxaca. The PFP carried out numerous detentions, later the source of denunciations of mistreatment. Another confrontation occurred on November 25, 2006, resulting in serious damage to public buildings and the detention of more than 149 people.
Between August 3 and 12 of this year, Sipaz conducted a visit to Oaxaca. We used the information collected on that trip to write a report attempting to give an overview of the situation in the State (“Oaxaca un conflicto no resuelto: actualización”, in Spanish). This article is a summary of the more detailed report. |
On August 5, 2007, the day of congressional elections for the State, the Governor of Oaxaca, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, announced to the press: “[The elections are] where citizens can decide what they want, what they support, and they will certainly vote for peace. [...] Many people said that the conflict was going to begin again, many said that there wouldn't be Guelaguetza this year [popular Oaxacan festival], many said that there would be violence around the elections. This is pure speculation; Oaxacans are at peace.” However, various factors of the current situation call this statement into grave doubt.
PHOTO: Police and buses blocking the road - © Oaxaca en Pie de Lucha
The confrontation of July 16
On July 19, the Oaxacan Human Rights Network (Red Oaxaqueña de Derechos Humanos, RODH) announced: “The conflict which began last year continues. Oaxaca IS NOT AT PEACE, as the State Government affirms and claims to the State's media.”(1)
Background
Several days before the confrontation, various events highlighted the potential risk of a violent situation unfolding. On June 14, 2007, a march was held to commemorate the police operative of the previous year. Thousands participated in the protest, making clear that the social issues which had mobilized broad sectors of the Oaxacan population were still unresolved. From June18 onwards, a symbolic blockade was established in the main square of the City of Oaxaca.
On June 27, the APPO declared itself in a state of maximum alert, and denounced “the increasing tension of the low intensity war which Ulises Ruiz is conducting against the people of Oaxaca”. On June 27, a negotiating table was established between teachers' representatives, the APPO and the Secretary General of the Government of Oaxaca, Manuel García Corpus. Among the topics discussed in the weeks which followed were the revision of the charges leveled against those in detention, and the cancellation of pending arrest warrants.
On July 12, the State Educational Assembly was established. It decided to boycott the “Official Guelaguetza” and instead organize a “Popular Guelaguetza”. A testimony from a representative of the Committee of Family and Friends of the Disappeared, Assassinated and Political Prisoners of Oaxaca (Comité de Familiares y Amigos de los Desaparecidos, Asesinados y Presos Políticos de Oaxaca, COFADAPPO) helps us understand what was at stake for the social movements. “Traditionally, Mondays on the Cerro were times of community sharing. Every town in the State brought their products, their dances. But the government began to commercialize the event, with entry costing 500 pesos [USD45]. [...] It was blatant theft by the government. Nobody knows where that money went. It was most likely a savings account for the current government.”
A woman member of Section 22 explained: “For the teachers, the idea was to boycott the Guelaguetza, and conduct another event which would show the strength which the movement still has. The first idea was to hold the fiesta on the Cerro del Fortín, and if that weren't possible, in another place which was safe for our colleagues. We didn't want any more deaths or detentions.”
On July 13, Beatriz Paredes, the National President of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, PRI), the same party as Oaxaca's governor, held a meeting with PRI candidates and militants in the Guelaguetza Auditorium, located on the Cerro del Fortín. From that moment on, the Cerro was surrounded by various police groups.

The festivity of the Calenda, 15th July
(© Oaxaca en Pie de Lucha)
The facts
On the morning of July 16, contingents of protesters left the main square of the City of Oaxaca for the Cerro el Fortín. When they arrived in the area around the Guelaguetza Auditorium, they found rows of police officers protecting the auditorium itself.
Sergio Segreste, Secretary of Civil Protection, explained their presence: “A security operative was implemented to protect the Guelaguetza Forum. Oaxaca survives exclusively on tourism and tourist wares. There is no industry. Guelaguetza is an important opportunity, which was suspended last year. [...] Additionally, the boycott and the Popular Guelaguetza had both been announced. We conducted a dissuasive rather than a preventative operation.”
According to eyewitness testimonies, the atmosphere was still that of a fiesta at the beginning of the day. Negotiation was attempted to allow the protesters to access the Cerro, but the police continued to block the way. Pressure increased amid the chants of “To the Fortín, to the Fortín, we're all going to the Fortín” and “Ulises, understand, Guelaguetza isn't for sale”. From that point on, versions of what happened differ.
PHOTO: One of the fires in Oaxaca, on the 16th July - © Oaxaca en Pie de Lucha
According to the official version, the aggression originated from the protesters. Sergio Segreste, present at the Cerro el Fortín that day, states: “They launched rockets at us to break the security barricade. [...] We repelled the aggression, which became more violent. [...] The barricade advanced. On the corner at the traffic lights, a bus crashed into a business. They held six buses hostage, as well as a truck belonging to a hotel. The police commanders had the following instructions: detain, subdue, hand over. There were possibly excesses. I saw great courage, high levels of violence which provoked human reactions in the police officers.”

The protesters offer various versions of events, most of them recognizing that amid so much tension, anger and confusion, any act conducted by infiltrators or by the police would have been enough to detonate violence.
The costs
The violent clash left at least 60 people wounded on both sides (15 of them police officers). Two of the wounded were taken to the hospital. Forty-two people were detained, some of them some time after or some distance from the actual confrontation. Among those detained were six minors, who were released the next day.
In an interview with SIPAZ, the Attorney General of the State of Oaxaca, Evencio Nicolás Martínez, said in relation to the detentions: “We found a wall of bottles/Molotov cocktails. The detentions were conducted at the scene of the crime. The protesters set fire to the hutof a hotel, there was damage to the building. For that reason they were detained. [...] The police repelled the aggression. Of course we are against any excesses. But we are human beings. Being a police officer doesn't deprive us of human rights.”
Regardless of the existence of crimes (and it still remains to connect the crimes to those detained for them), in terms of human rights the costs of the repression are worrisome. Many photos from the confrontation raise unanswered questions. For example, in photos of those detained and taken to the car park of the auditorium, instead of the Public Ministry, it can be seen that those detained are on their knees, blindfolded, barefoot, evidently humiliated. In one particular case, like that of Hemeterio Marino Cruz (hospitalized in serious condition), what happened to cause him so many injuries, hours after giving himself up without resisting arrest?
A week after the confrontation, the Offical Guelaguetza was held under strict police control. “The Official Guelaguetza was a failure. Only the police and those forced to be there could get people into the Guelaguetza Auditorium. Guelaguetza isn’t about Ulises, it's about the people,” assured Erangelio Mendoza, councillor of the APPO.
PHOTO: Emeterio Marino Cruz, detaines by two policemen - © Difusión Emeterio Marino Cruz
“Institutional crisis in Oaxaca”?
The bulletin issued by the Oaxaca Human Rights Network concerning the events of 16 July, cited above, highlights: “It's important to mention that the violence which was once again unleashed exists because the crisis has not been resolved. There have been no answers to the social demands at the root of the violence.”
Marcos Leyva from EDUCA (Service of an Alternative Education) emphasizes: “In the past three years (2004-2007), Oaxaca has experienced a severe institutional crisis which has drawn the State into a social and political emergency.” The situation grew worse in 2006 because of the political crisis which followed the events of June 14, 2006 generated by a greater polarization of political positions taken in relation to the conflict on the one hand, and by the high costs of the conflict's violence on the other.”
Alma Soto, of the Committee for the Liberation of Detainees of 25 November (Comité de Liberación 25 de Noviembre), adds: “In Oaxaca, rule of law doesn’t exist. Since June 14 last year, there have been various confrontations. [...] In that time, 600 people have been detained in an illegal and arbitrary manner by police, parapolice and military organizations, up to 4 to 6 hours after the actual confrontation. People have been transported to military areas. Detainees have been kept entirely incomunicado, and for family members and lawyers it has been difficult to get precise information on the charges relating to the detention. There is a lack of security for lawyers and human rights defenders.”
PHOTO: Emeterio Marino Cruz, a few days after the beating - © Difusión Emeterio Marino Cruz
Numerous national and international human rights organizations have denounced serious human rights violations of both Mexican and foreign citizens. According to these sources, those primarily responsible for these abuses have been agents of the municipal, state and federal police, and in many circumstances non-uniformed police officers or organized groups of armed individuals, apparently acting in coordination with the state security forces. (See the Human Rights section of the Sipaz report.)

An injured journalist
(© Oaxaca en Pie de Lucha)
The elections
August: State elections
The elections of August 5 were held in a relatively calm atmosphere, much more so than the pre-electoral situation indicated. In a public declaration released prior to the elections, the teachers announced: “Ulises Ruiz Ortiz has organized State elections, which explains why he has repressed citizens with such care, to demobilize the citizenry, [...] to induce the fear-vote and win the faithful votes for his party, to reduce the vote which would punish him [for his actions].” The opposition parties also denounced the continuation of traditional PRI practices such as coopting and buying votes, and forcing the choices of voters.
Although 98.87% of the 4,574 polling booths were established, the big winner in the elections was abstentionism. More than 1,500,000 people (70% of registered voters) chose not to vote. The PRI maintained its majority in Congress, which will give greater stability to the government of Ulises Ruiz for the next three years. The grassroots movements express the fear that the government will take advantage of this situation to exact revenge, asphyxiating the communities which have rebelled against the State Executive.
How are we to comprehend that the PRI continues to win elections despite clear social discontent? According to Marcos Leyva from EDUCA, “The political parties have not been able to read the grassroots movement. The Democratic Revolution Party (Partido de la Revolución Democrática, PRD) has played and continues to play an ambiguous role. This has had its effect on voters. If you’d like to bet that it won't be a PRI Congress, go to the list of the Coalition for the Good of Everyone (Coalición por el Bien de Todos) and that's where you’ll find many of the PRI candidates.”
October: Municipal elections
The process of electing 152 municipal presidents (mayors) through the party system was conducted amid high political tension. (Of the 570 municipalities in Oaxaca, the remaining number elect their authorities according to traditional voting systems.) The cost was various confrontations, some with gunfire, resulting in 13 people wounded. In the municipality of Santiago Laollaga, the election could not be held. Accusations of vote-buying and -coopting abounded, in addition to take people to the polling places, accusations predominantly leveled against the PRI. As in the State elections, voter abstention was quite high (greater than 45%). In total, the PRI won 90 of the 151 councils in contention.
The grassroots movement
The APPO
In recent months, the APPO has suffered a certain degree of dispersion, partly as a consequence of the repression and partly because of the ideological differences which have existed within the assembly since its founding. These differences were temporarily bypassed when members of the APPO had a one unified demand: the resignation of Ulises Ruiz.
However, the accusations of corruption and errors by the leadership continue. According to one member of Oaxacan Voices Building Autonomy and Freedom (Voces Oaxaqueñas construyendo Autonomía y Libertad, VOCAL), “the people are tired of their 'representatives'. They had placed their hopes in the leaders again, but now, once the marches are finished, nobody stays to listen to the speeches.”
Although it is difficult to contemplate other scenarios given the complexity of the conflict, Marco Leyva of EDUCA says: “We've thought of the APPO as an organizational structure with its 252 councillors. But the APPO isn't a formal structure. However, there are certain things which have remained: the spirit, the the contagiousness of the APPO [...] there has been an awakening. People no longer want to be silent and put up with the situation. [...] That has been the contribution of the APPO. As an organizational tool, creativity will be needed in order to maintain its form.”
The teachers
The teachers also find themselves in a complex situation. Their key leader, Pacheco Rueda, heavily stigmatized for his role in the negotiations last year, has disappeared from the political scene. The group has still not conducted the pending internal elections to choose his replacement. As is well known, Section 22 has been the spine of the APPO, which has given structure to the popular movement. The question is whether they wish to maintain that leadership, particularly now that the union has achieved greater gains than ever before for teachers.
Marcos Leyva states: “There has been a high level of burnout within the union. Section 22 used to achieve its demands by applying the motto 'protest-negotiate-protest'. They don't want to lose the possibility of negotiating. Taking on a role in the vanguard has been a difficult adjustment to make.”
EPR and armed dissent
In July 2007, the Popular Revolutionary Army (Ejército Popular Revolucionario, EPR: an armed group which appeared in Mexico in 1996) claimed responsibility for PEMEX (Mexican Petroleum) pipeline explosions in Guanajuato and Querétaro. They claimed that they were part of a campaign to demand the release of two of their companions, Edmundo Reyes Amaya and Gabriel Alberto Cruz Sánchez, both of whom were disappeared by state forces in Oaxaca in May 2007. Subsequently, the EPR claimed responsibility for an August 1 explosion in a shopping center in the City of Oaxaca, warning that they are ready “to keep on going” with their campaign.
Many of the participants we interviewed highlighted that the EPR has been used as a smokescreen by the government, particularly at the time of the elections. Sergio Beltrán from Unitierra commented: “There are definitely enormous challenges facing the Popular Revolutionary Democratic Party (Partido Democrático Popular Revolucionario, PROCUP). Following the death of Lucio Cabañas, it's possible that the EPR has managed to unify cells which were previously dispersed. [...] Right now, the EPR is giving URO [Ulises Ruiz Ortiz] a pretext for pressuring the federal government to intervene.”
Marcos Leyva from EDUCA adds: “The EPR exists and has a strong presence. [...] Here we enter into the world of the underground left, where tactical alliances are formed with the idea of maintaining a prolonged popular war. On the barricades we saw actions that made it clear that they hadn't learned them in only three nights. They're trained, and it's a factor which has to be taken into account.”
It has been repeated time and again that the closing of channels of dialogue and negotiation could corner social movements, forcing them into more radical forms of dissent. A July 2007 article by Gustavo Esteva entitled “Desnudar la verdad” [“Undressing the truth”], makes this clear(2): “In such a climate, when people are exhausted by endless democratic processes, only to be humiliated, what are they supposed to do? Of course, it's not a question of binary options, violence or non-violence... But when people decide to resort to violence because all of their other options have ended in desperation, should we condemn them?”
In such a tense situation, a spontaneous act which occurred on 16 July is worth mentioning. Despite the reigning oppression, 40 people sat down and remained seated in a nonviolent act of civil resistance. After an hour, the police left the protest site. One of the participants shared their testimony: “I stop to look down the street, sitting on the pavement with my eyes full of tears and my throat burning [from the teargas], and behind me I can hear sticks and boots. But my attention is focussed on the four streets below which are blocked off by a crowd of people who are watching, stunned and frightened, as we sit down blocking the path of the police. Suddenly someone says, 'they're going,' and unlike, in the previous combats, you don't hear them say a word. Later, like in the movies, the rain starts to fall, still in silence, and I get up and think that this time we won the battle.”(3)
Notes:
- RODH bulletin - in Spanish

- Article by Gustavo Esteva - in Spanish

- Testimony - in Spanish


:: SIPAZ ACTIVITIES
August to mid-October 2007
INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE AND ACCOMPANIMENT
Human rights defenders
On August 14 and 15, we participated in a workshop on “Risk analysis and protective measures for human rights defenders”, organized by Project Counseling Service. .
CHIAPAS
Zona Norte
In October, before, during and after the municipal elections, we were present in various communities and cities in the Northern Region of Chiapas. There, we conducted meetings with various actors in the area: leaders of different political groups, governmental organizations, members of the church, Zapatista support bases, as well as peasant farmer and grassroots organizations. We also traveled to Choles de Tumbalá, near Palenque, a Zapatista community displaced for a period of three months in 2006 as a result of a violent eviction.
Altos
On September 29, we attended the opening of the autonomous public market “1st of January” in the municipal center of San Andrés Sakamch’en de los Pobres. Despite the threats against the autonomous council, which were received only a few days before the event, thousands of people from the region participated in the celebration.
Selva/Cañadas
- On August 8 we participated in the Forum Against Repression which was held in the community El Carrizal, in the municipality of Ocosingo, with the participation of representatives of the organizations from Chiapas, Oaxaca, Hidalgo, San Luís Potosí, Veracruz and Michoacán which form the National Front of the Fight for Socialism (Frente Nacional de Lucha por el Socialismo, FNLS).
- On September 6, we accompanied the relocation of the families from Nuevo San Manuel and Buen Samaritano (Montes Azules) who were evicted from their communities on August 18 this year. They were moved from La Trinitaria to Ocosingo.
- In October, we held meetings with various non-governmental, religious and grassroots organizations in Ocosingo, Chilón, Bachajón and Yajalón.
Caracoles/Otra Campaña
- We conducted visits to three of the five Caracoles.
- In October, we participated as observers in the First Meeting of the Indigenous Peoples of America, conducted in Yaqui territory in Vicam, Sonora, in the north of Mexico.
OAXACA
In August, we conducted a 10-day visit to Oaxaca to coincide with the dates of the state's Congressional elections. We met with various grassroots organizations, non-governmental organizations and government authorities (see the report in Spanish “Actualización: Un conflicto todavía abierto: la situación socio-política y las violaciones a derechos humanos en Oaxaca”). We also visited David Venegas and Adán Mejía in the Ixcotel prison.
GUERRERO
We updated the Guerrero section of our website.
INFORMAtION
- We received visits, delegations (for example, from Chiapas Peace House Project and Unitierra Oaxaca), students and journalists. We gave these groups an introduction to the current political context of Chiapas and the work of Sipaz.
- In August, we attended a workshop on the Alliance for the Security and Prosperity in North America (Alianza para la Seguridad y la Prosperidad en América del Norte, ASPAN), jointly organized by the Center or Economic and Political Research for Community Action (Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas para la Acción Comunitaria, CIEPAC) and the Mexican Network for Action Against Free Trade (Red Mexicana de Acción Frente al Libre Comercio, RMALC).
- In August, together with CIEPAC and the Network of Human Rights Defenders (Red de Defensores de Derechos Humanos) we launched the monthly space for reflection, analysis, debate, contributions and suggestions called Speaking Out Loud (En Voz Alta). See the Spanish-language blog http://blogenvozalta.wordpress.com).
PROMOTION OF PEACE
PEACE EDUCATION
- In September, we participated in an ecumenical space for prayer and reflection, organized by the Ecumenical Group for Analysis of the Current Political Reality (Grupo Ecuménico de Análisis de la Coyuntura de la Realidad, GEACR), of which Sipaz forms part.
- We are currently facilitating workshops on transforming conflicts with the organization Economic and Social Development for Indigenous Mexicans (DESMI).
- In August we facilitaded a 5-day diploma course “Ministries for Peacebuilders in Contexts of Violence”, organized by the Mayan Intercultural Seminary in San Cristóbal de las Casas.
NETWORKING
- SIPAZ participated in the monthly meetings of the Network for Peace (Red por la Paz), a space for action and reflection comprised of 16 organizations who seek to support peace and reconciliation processes in Chiapas.
- On August 16, together with the Ik Collective, SIPAZ called a meeting of organizations working with prisoners. The participants shared information, actions and analyzed the current issues.

:: New documents on the Website

|