:: CURRENT AFFAIRS

Mexico 2008: Turbulence on the horizon?

NAFTA and social discontent

According to the majority of Mexican social and civilian organizations, we’re facing a dark panorama as we enter 2008. These organizations highlight the increase in the costs of basic products, fuel and electricity, as well as the possible consequences of opening the fishing and farming markets as part of the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1994 by Mexico, the United States and Canada.

On 1 January 2008, the NAFTA clauses regarding the cancellation of taxes on basic grains such as beans and corn, as well as milk and oil products, came into effect. Despite protests by farmers towards the end of 2007, the Mexican government has refused to renegotiate these articles. Campesino groups, the federal opposition and several academics have warned that Mexican farmers aren’t ready to enter into competition – either in regard to prices or to quantity of products – with powerful US producers. This difficulty is particularly acute when one compares the difference in the subsidies offered on either side of the border. According to the representative of the National Campesino Confederation (Confederación Nacional Campesina, CNC), Cruz López Aguilar, more than 1,400,000 corn, beans and rice producers are at risk from the total access to imports to the Mexican market.

Photo: © Noé Pineda Arredondo

According to the Secretary of Agriculture, Cattle-farming, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación, Sagarpa), Alberto Cárdenas, contrary to the opinion expressed by several campesino organizations, NAFTA has had a positive impact. “While NAFTA has brought Mexican producers into greater competition, it also opened multiple opportunities to access a regional market of more than 430 million people.” Cárdenas declared that Mexico is in good conditions for the commercial liberalization as “the [tariff] deduction process had been slow and sure,” and as of 2007 some 90% of tariffs had already been eliminated. As a result, in 2008 “there shouldn’t be any significant changes in their [the farmers’] market situation, particularly given the high prices predicted for the coming months.” He added that with NAFTA opening up the markets, “subsistence farmers won’t suffer any ill effects, as they in fact don’t participate in that market; on the contrary, they will benefit from the access to goods and services at more accessible prices.”

Bearing the motto of a campaign launched in 2007, “Without corn and beans there is no country” (“Sin maís no hay país, sin frijol tampoco”), campesinos and producers have been organizing themselves. In January, some 20 organizations announced their alliance as a National Front to Defend the Mexican Countryside (Frente Nacional en Defensa del Campo Mexicano). The Front has demanded government measures to confront the crisis situation caused by the market opening, and they called a mega-protest for 31 January 2008, at which they expect the attendance of social and trade union organizations.

Photo: World Social Forum 2008, Mexico - “Without corn and beans there is no country”

Federal government: “iron fist” and increasing militarization

In line with increasing social pressures, complaints against the “iron fist” policy of Felipe Calderón’s government – as well as the process of increasing militarization across the country – continue to be heard. This tendency has become even more marked with the recent announcement of new forms of collaboration between the United States and Mexico, launched under the pretext of the fight against “drug trafficking and terrorism.”

Photo: World Social Forum 2008, Mexico- Militarization

One plan which continued to be strengthened in 2007 was the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), an agreement between Mexico, Canada and the United States initiated in 2005. The SPP is presented as an enhanced free trade agreement, adding security elements to those of development and commerce.

Simultaneously, the governments of the United States and Mexico are about to finalize an agreement aimed at supporting the fight against drug trafficking and organized crime in Mexico. The idea took shape in March 2007, when US President George W. Bush visited the Mexican city of Mérida. Because of its similarity to Plan Colombia (a policy implemented almost a decade ago in Colombia which involves the contribution of US $4.3 billion to the Colombian government, 76% of which is military aid), this new initiative is known as “Plan Mexico;” to a lesser degree, its official name “The Merida Initiative” is used.

The Bush Administration has proposed to ask Congress to approve a joint package of US $1.4 billion to be distributed over three years (thus committing the incoming Administration, following the 2008 elections, to fulfill the obligation). The package has been presented to Congress as “emergency funding for other critical national security needs.” The proposal highlights the Initiative as “vital assistance for our partners in Mexico and Central America, who are working to break up drug cartels, and fight organized crime, and stop human trafficking. All of these are urgent priorities of the United States, and the Congress should fund them without delay.” In this context, it is worth noting that in 2007 there were more than 2,000 deaths linked to organized crime, and that the US shares a border of more than 3,000 km with Mexico.

The first consignments of funds will be directed to the supply of military equipment and communication and surveillance technology, as well as various forms of capacity building for Mexican soldiers and officials. For the time being, there are no plans to deploy US troops in Mexican territory.

Photo: Protests against Bush in Mérida

Worrisome factors which have been named by human rights groups on both sides of the border include the fact that more than 40% of US $500 million authorized for distribution in the first year will be directed to the military sector, despite the serious accusations of human rights violations committed by the Mexican army in national security operatives. In October, Human Rights Watch (HRW) declared that the US Congress should oppose the anti-drug assistance to Mexico, unless the agreement includes strict conditions designed to halt abuses committed by Mexican security forces. José Miguel Vivanco, Americas Director at HRW, stated, “helping Mexico confront its brutal drug cartels is a good idea. Giving a blank check to that country’s abusive security forces is not.”

Other analysts highlight that there is no guarantee of gaining improved outcomes in the fight against drug trafficking when the powerful offensives launched by Felipe Calderón at the beginning of his six-year term have as yet not had the expected results. Mexican critics note that the fact that Washington locates the battle against drugs and delinquency in Mexican territory as one of the “critical needs” of its national security demonstrates interference. In addition, the reference to the topic of “people trafficking” brings into question whether this could allow for the persecution of Central and South American migrants to Mexico, or even including Mexicans who attempt to cross their nation’s northern and southern borders.

In October, at the 1^st Integration Meeting of the Governors of the South–South-Eastern Region in Villahermosa, Tabasco, the “security” factor seemed to be given greater emphasis than the issue of “development.” During a meeting with Mexico’s nine southern governors, Felipe Calderón said that he would give “renewed thrust” to Plan Puebla-Panama (PPP), asking that it be converted into a “project of integral development for Mesoamerica.” However, Calderón stressed the reinforcement of the southern border given the “collapse” of the local authority’s capacity to control it.

Photo: 1^st Integration Meeting of the Governors of the South–South-Eastern Region in Villahermosa, Tabasco (© La Revista Peninsular)

Red light on human rights

Despite the preoccupations expressed by the Interamerican Human Rights Commission of the Organization of American States (OAS), as well as various national and international human rights organizations, the definitive approval of the Executive’s proposed penal reform appears to be imminent.

Concerns have been raised that the penal reform will be contrary to the presumption of innocence and due process of the law. It will allow the Federal Public Prosecutor’s office and any police corps to tap phones, and enter and search private homes – this without a warrant, only relying on the suspicion that the individual has a presumed connection with organized crime or that he/she may be in the act of committing a crime.

The President of the National Human Rights Commission (Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos, CNDH), José Luis Soberanes, affirmed in December that the legal reforms “represent a backward step in terms of human rights, as illegality cannot be fought by stepping on the most basic guarantees.”

Even though the reform has not yet come into effect, several human rights organizations have pointed out the risk of legalizing the criminalization of public protest. In the last months, the issues of prisoners ‑ and repression in general ‑ has been a topic which has generated denunciations and created alliances. On 1 November, for example, the National Front Against Repression (Frente Nacional Contra la Represión, FNCR), which united diverse organizations and movements, held a meeting in front of the Government’s Secretariat to demand the freedom of all of Mexico’s “political prisoners,” the safe return of all forcibly disappeared people, the abolition of torture, the end of sexual aggressions and violations against women, and the cancellation of arrest warrants and persecution against social justice activists.

In November, the Solidarity Network Decade Against Impunity launched a report entitled “The Situation of Political Prisoners in Mexico,” in which they quote the figure of 500 political prisoners. The Network recognizes the difficulties of calculating an accurate figure, given the limited documentation available and the conditions in which the court cases are conducted.

The release of indigenous prisoner Diego Méndez Arcos (detained in 2006 for his alleged participation in the deaths which occurred in Viejo Velasco, Chiapas) at the beginning of December is, like his detention, an example of the arbitrary nature of the judicial process.

In other news, an issue which places Mexico at the “head in the matter of limiting the freedom of expression” (according to Amerigo Incalcaterra, representative of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) is that of threats and assassinations against journalists.

Photo: Political Prisoners. David Venegas

In a ranking released in October in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index 2007, Mexico continues to be the most dangerous country in the Americas for journalists. It appeared in position 136 of the 169 nations included in the study. Benoît Hervieu, head of the Americas desk at Reporters without Borders, emphasized, “for more than a year, the federal government of Mexico has been going backwards in terms of press freedom, and it demonstrated this during the crisis in Oaxaca.” Hervieu pointed out that this regression in the press situation reflects the lack of political will shown by the federal government to advance on this issue.

In January, the National Human Rights Commission announced that it had opened 84 complaint cases in 2007 because of violations of individual safety against journalists acting in a professional capacity. The Commission revealed that the cases had multiplied and are in fact more violent than in previous years. The recent dismissal of journalist Carmen Aristegui, anchor of the W Radio news program “Hoy Por Hoy”, also generated grave concerns about the issue of freedom of expression in Mexico.

Another case which has caused a flurry of articles is that of journalist Lidia Cacho. At the end of November, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) eliminated from its final judgment in her case any information concerning sexual abuse, pedophile networks and child pornography. This information was considered unrelated to the investigation against her, which was being coordinated by a group of Mexican authorities, led by Mario Marín, Governor of Puebla. The National Front Against Repression expressed their concern that the SCJN had shown “indolence” in the matter, even before they came to the session when they would consider the cases of the conflicts in Oaxaca and San Salvador Atenco. The High Commissioner of the United Nations (UN), through her representative in Mexico, declared that “it would have been an important opportunity to confirm the principles which the country has already ratified.”

CHIAPAS: Zapatistas readjust their strategic position because of threats

Between 13 and 17 December, an international colloquium was held in memory of Andrés Aubry, a French historian who worked in Chiapas for more than 40 years until his death in September 2007. Hosted by the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN), CIDECI-Unitierra and the Immanuel Wallerstein Center, participants in the colloquium included such national and international personalities as John Berger, Naomi Klein, François Houtart, Pablo González Casanova, Sylvia Marcos, Enrique Dussel, Jorge Alonso, Carlos Rojas Aguirre and Jean Robert, who spoke to the crowd of several hundred people.

In his last speech, “Feeling Red: The Calendar and Geography of War”, Subcomandante Marcos clarified his role as military leader of the EZLN, an army he defined as “a different one, it’s true, but still an army.” He announced, “this is the last time, at least for a while, that we come out for activities of this type ‑ I’m referring to the colloquium, meetings, round tables, conferences, in addition to, of course, interviews.”

Marcos explained that this decision was made as a response to a new wave of aggressions: “but it is the first time since that early morning in January of 1994 that the social, national, and international response has been insignificant or null. It is the first time that these aggressions cynically come from supposedly leftist governments, or that they are being perpetuated with the support, without hiding it, from the institutional left.” In addition, the Subcomandante warned, “we will try to continue the consolidation of the civil and peaceful effort of what we still call ‘The Other Campaign,’ and, at the same time, we’re prepared to resist, alone, the reactivation of the aggressions against us, be it through the army, police or paramilitary groups. Those of us who have made war know how to recognize the paths through which it is prepared and how it comes closer. The signs of war on the horizon are clear. The war, like fear, also has a smell. And now we can begin to breathe its stench in our lands.” A document signed by the participants in the colloquium echoes this position: “We cannot allow another Acteal in Mexican territory. The people cannot be sidelined to the point where they defend themselves from violence with violence.”

For the same reason, in September 2007 the EZLN announced the suspension of the tour planned with The Other Campaign (a peaceful initiative promoted by the Zapatistas at a national level) in order to concentrate their energies in defensive actions to protect their communities. In the last few months, several aggressions against the support bases have been denounced. These have principally come from the PRI-affiliated organization OPDDIC (Organization for the Defense of the Rights of Indigenous People and Campesinos, Organización Para la Defensa de los Derechos Indígenas y Campesinos). In a dispute over territory which is becoming progressively more open, the cases in question range from the north of Chiapas (the case of Bolon Ajaw in November, in the autonomous municipality Región de la Montaña, officially known as Tumbalá, a tourist destination because of its proximity to the waterfalls of Agua Azul), passing through the Tseltal region of Chilón, part of Las Cañadas, and arriving in the Highlands of Chiapas (with the October death threats against the Autonomous Council of the Municipality of San Andrés Sakamch’en de los Pobres.

A caravan comprised of members of The Other Campaign, which traveled through parts of Chiapas in November, denounced the following: “The federal and state governments, through the institutions of agriculture and in coordination with the Mexican Federal Army and public security forces at the three levels of government, have put into operation a counterinsurgency strategy against the Zapatista support bases and their autonomous authorities. Agrarian land titles have been granted to different indigenous organizations, particularly those adverse to the Zapatistas, and in several cases armed organizations. Among these is the Organization for the Defense of the Rights of Indigenous People and Campesinos (OPDDIC) and the Regional Campesino Indigenous Union (Unión Regional Campesino Indígena, URCI). […] These organizations are occupying lands reclaimed by the EZLN in 1994 and, via the agrarian authorities, they consolidate the legal plundering of Zapatista lands by constituting new ejidos [community farming lands].”

Armed groups: communiqués

In October, the Revolutionary Popular Army (Ejército Popular Revolucionario, EPR) threatened to escalate their “national harassment campaign” if the government did not safely return their combatants who were forcibly “disappeared” in May 2007. The EPR made clear that it would “never” seek dialog with the federal government, but rather that this was a proposal made by several senators in September. In December, the EPR announced the reopening of hostilities against the government of Felipe Calderón. In January, the group indicated that it would give advance notice of any military attacks it would conduct. They also warned legislators that “those from the Chamber of Representatives and Senators, from any political party, who approve the judicial reform proposed by Calderón which criminalizes protest, the fight for social justice and acts of self-defense, should be ready to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.”

For their part, in November the Revolutionary Movement Lucio Cabañas (Movimiento Revolucionario Lucio Cabañas), one of the guerrilla groups which placed explosives in the seats of the Electoral Tribunal and some banks in Mexico City in 2006, warned that the Merida Initiative signed by the Mexican government with the United States would be repelled by actions from mass movements and revolutionary groups.

:: FOCUS

Impunity and the responsibility of Mexican authorities in the Acteal case

“The killing of 46 defenseless civilians in Acteal, in December 1997, by a group of people bearing high-power weapons, is without doubt the gravest and most dramatic incident which has occurred in the conflict in Chiapas. The CNDH [National Human Rights Commission] established the responsibility, by commission or omission, of various public officials of the MexicanState.”
[Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of the Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous People, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, E/CN.4/2004/80/Add.2, 23/12/2003]

“The State denies that the events analyzed here constitute part of any State strategy […] The public position of the federal and state governments is to refuse to recognize the existence of ‘paramilitaries’.”
[Report given by the Mexican State to the Interamerican Human Rights Commission as part of the documentation in the Petition 212-05, 2006]

Efforts have been made to “reroute the truth and make others believe that the State had nothing to do with the massacre, but we tell you that what happened in Acteal was a result of a political conflict designed from above, in the federal government of Ernesto Zedillo and the state government of Julio César Ruiz Ferro.”
[Communiqué of the Civilian Organization The Bees (Organización Sociedad Civil Las Abejas), 22 October 2007]

On 22 December 1997, in Acteal, Municipality of Chenalhó, in the Highlands of Chiapas, a massacre was perpetrated in which 45 Tsotsil indigenous people belonging to the Civilian Organization The Bees lost their lives. They were assassinated by a group of armed civilians as they prayed for peace in the church of the community. In their communiqué published on 22 November 2007, the Bees denounced, “we have spent 10 years demanding justice. The response has always been the same: all the authorities have said ‘we’re going to investigate in depth and with great seriousness,’ feigning worry and indignation for the events which occurred.”

Through its “Campaign Against Impunity: 10 and 15”, named for the 10 year anniversary of the massacre and the 15 year anniversary of their organized struggle, the Bees have proposed an even greater challenge: “nobody will be able to stop our campaign against impunity, because our struggle is not only about Acteal, but rather against all of the massacres and incidents of repression against our Mexican communities. We will not rest until we finally see justice carried out, against whoever needs to face justice, without any discrimination” (communiqué, 22 December 2007).

Antecedents to a “massacre foretold”, or the first stage of omission?

The Civilian Organization The Bees was formed in the municipality of Chenalhó (in the Highlands of Chiapas) in 1992. They united as a pacifist organization in the battle for indigenous rights and the peaceful resolution of local conflicts (see “Las Abejas (The Bees) Continue to Fly”, April 1998, SIPAZ report Vol.3, No.2). Although, as they note, their basic demands are the same as those of the EZLN, the Bees are opposed to armed struggle. They participated in the “peace belts” during the negotiation process between Zapatistas and the federal government in the nearby town of San Andrés Larrainzar, as well as in other activities to which the EZLN had invited civilian groups and organizations. It was perhaps this political proximity to the Zapatista position, together with the fact they neither have nor wish to have weapons that made them more vulnerable in the increasingly conflictive situation, which made itself apparent in Chenalhó throughout 1997.

It is impossible to avoid outlining the situation in the State of Chiapas at the time of the massacre, acting as if the killings were an isolated incident. From 1995 onwards, and while the San Andrés dialogs unfolded, the EZLN and several civilian organizations began to denounce the State’s simultaneous application of a counterinsurgency strategy in the North of Chiapas ‑ the promotion and protection of the group “Peace and Justice”, causing the displacement of thousands as well as more than 100 forced disappearances and assassinations. Months later, this strategy was implemented in the Highlands and Jungle Regions of Chiapas, taking on even more clearly the characteristics of “low intensity warfare.” The government seemed to be banking on the possibility that the EZLN would lose the support it enjoyed at a local, national and international level through a prolonged war of attrition comprised of political, military, economic, legal and communication dimensions.

During 1997, a wave of violence was unleashed across Chiapas. In response, a group of national and international civilian organizations, including SIPAZ, conducted a National and International Civilian Peace Observation Mission in Chiapas with the aim of carrying out field research and documentation of the denunciations of human rights violations and their implications for the Peace Process.

In Chenalhó, the conditions of the thousands of displaced people – in terms of health, clothing, housing and food – were critical. The Mission received testimonies that spoke of armed civilians and their repeated attacks against communities where members of the Zapatistas or the Bees were present and refused to collaborate in the purchase of more weapons. The terror caused by these attacks forced people to flee and seek refuge in the mountains, abandoning all of their belongings. At the same time, journalist Ricardo Rocha aired a documentary report on Televisa, one of the most-watched television stations in Mexico, which showed evidence of the living conditions of those displaced in Chenalhó.

In their communiqué on 22 October 2007, the Bees referred to the facts compiled by the Observation Mission and the Rocha segment: “before the massacre, those who called themselves ‘self-defense groups’ (a less political term for ‘paramilitaries’) came armed to indigenous communities, in pick-up trucks and accompanied by trucks of the State’s Public Security Police.” This would evidently indicate another kind of responsibility that can be laid at the door of State authorities in the lead up to the massacre.

On a federal level, on 18 October 1997, Raúl Vera López, then bishop of San Cristóbal, had sent a letter to the Chiapas Government Secretary Emilio Chuayffet, in which he warned of the “violent atmosphere” prevailing in the area. After the massacre, Chuayffet admitted that he had received this letter, but commented that “those who commit these acts have two advantages in their favor: surprise and their clandestine nature. It’s very difficult, practically impossible, that all of the violent incidents of this kind in the world could be avoided based on the mere knowledge of an atmosphere of violence.”

Chronicle of the massacre and the responsibility of public authorities: opposing versions

On 22 December 1997, a group of the Bees was in the church located in Acteal. They were praying for peace in their community, and others in the municipality from which an increasing number of people were being displaced, either for supporting the EZLN or for refusing to support a group who opposed them. The attackers began firing with high-caliber weapons, pursuing the victims who tried to flee. They mutilated several people with blunt weapons, and sliced open the stomachs of four pregnant women. In a killing spree which lasted for more than five hours, the assailants slayed nine men, 21 women (four of whom were pregnant) and 15 children.

Witnesses who managed to flee warned Gonzalo Ituarte, then vicar in the Diocese of San Cristóbal de las Casas, one hour after the massacre began. Ituarte immediately informed Chiapas Government Secretary Homer Tovilla Cristiani, who replied a few hours later that everything was under control. Despite their presence only 200m from the massacre itself, members of the Public Security Police did not intervene, even after being informed by neighbors of what was occurring in the church of Acteal.

Emilio Chuayffet, then secretary of the federal government , rejected the suggestion that the federal government was responsible through either action or omission. On 23 December, President Zedillo condemned the attack and announced that the federal government would take charge of the investigation. A few days after the massacre, 40 alleged aggressors, all with affiliations to the PRI or to the Cardenista Front for National Reconstruction Party, were arrested. Jacinto Arias Cruz, mayor of Chenalhó, was also arrested, accused of being the instigator of the massacre. At the end of December, 5,000 more soldiers arrived in Chiapas, with 2,000 deployed in Chenalhó alone. The number of displaced people increased significantly, eventually reaching around 10,000 people. At the beginning of 1998, Chiapas Governor Julio César Ruiz Fero and Government Secretary Emilio Chuayffet were both dismissed from their positions.

However, Carlos Payán Velver, then president of the COCOPA (Commission for Agreement and Pacification, legislative organ to promote collaboration in the dialogues between the EZLN and the federal government), affirmed that from the beginning the president himself and the governor of Chiapas held “very great responsibility” in the massacre.

The years passed. The “official” version of the massacre as an incident caused by intercommunity conflict was recently given new life in the Mexican magazine Nexos, in two articles by Héctor Aguilar Camín, which were published towards the end of 2007. In line with the thesis published in the “White Book”, the author explains that because of Zapatista violence and the fact that the security forces’ hands were tied (by the Law for Dialogue, which prevented military actions against the EZLN while the Peace Process was open), various groups spontaneously armed themselves, then passed from the defensive to the offensive. Derived from this thesis is the idea that the State found itself in the middle, unable to act

In its last report on the Mexican State’s responsibility in the Acteal Massacre (22 December 2007), the Fray Bartolomé de las Casas Human Rights Center again denounces the intentionality and the premeditation of the federal government in this case. The report states that Acteal was “the ideal justification by which Ernesto Zedillo, then president and supreme commander of the armed forces, could order the installation of military camps in Chenalhó, and thus continue to develop the counterinsurgency plan.”

Legal advances

According to the reports of the above-mentioned Human Rights Center and other human rights organizations, investigations into the massacre have resulted in guilty findings being handed down against more than 70 people accused of being directly implicated in the attack. They received sentences of between 25 and 40 years in prison for the crimes of aggravated homicide, aggravated injury, and bearing weapons authorized for the exclusive use of the armed forces without the appropriate licenses. The cases for delinquent association were not concluded. To date, 27 arrest warrants against indigenous people are yet to be served.

Many of these sentences are in the process of being contested. Those responsible for the defense of the prisoners have denounced that they were detained despite contradictory testimonies, which don’t agree even in the number of attackers present in the massacre, and that those who are allegedly responsible for the crime had no access to either lawyers or translators in the first stages of the proceedings. Another version of events is related to the fact that five of the accused confessed in the days following the massacre that they were responsible, together with four other individuals who still remain free. Regardless of which version of events is being examined, there are clearly many tasks pending for the Mexican justice system.

Fifteen former (low-level) government employees were tried and condemned to sentences of between three and 36 years in prison for aggravated homicide and injury, homicide and injury by omission or for bearing firearms authorized for the exclusive use of the Mexican Army. Two arrest warrants have been issued – but not served – against the then state police coordinator and the director of the state public security police.

The 22 December 2007 detention of Antonio Sántiz López, alleged “head of the Chenalhó paramilitaries”, has been brought into question by critics. They consider that this step, hailed by the local press as a great achievement for the justice system – it was published as the detention of “the intellectual author of the massacre” – is actually a way of covering up responsibility at other levels. High-level officials, including members of the army, who are suspected of involvement in the massacre either through omission or acquiescence towards those responsible, have given no account for their actions and have continued to elude the justice system.

Given the lack of advances on a national level, the Fray Bartolomé de las Casas Human Rights Center together with survivors and family members of those assassinated in the massacre, presented a Petition to Open a Case in the Interamerican Human Rights Commission in February 2005. They also issued a Petition to Open a Case against the Mexican State for various human rights violations committed in the case of the Acteal Massacre. In an interview published in the magazine Proceso (on 21 April 2005), Bishop Raúl Vera López commented on the request: “The situation cannot remain in impunity; the rule of law must be reestablished. In accordance with international law, crimes against the indigenous population of Chiapas (assassination, torture, forced disappearances) are crimes against humanity. Accusations are being made against Ernesto Zedillo.”

During the National Gathering Against Impunity in December 2007 (described below), a campaign was announced to denounce ex President Ernesto Zedillo for “permitting the massacre,” and to demand that he be expelled from his Chair at the prestigious US institution, Yale University. Zedillo is currently the director of Yale’s Center for the Study of Globalization.

Impunity, a national plague

The Bees have declared time and again that they don’t want revenge for the Acteal Massacre. They continue to demand justice so that events like this are not repeated. In this line, in 2007 they conducted a campaign to commemorate 10 years of impunity for the massacre, and 15 years of existence of their organization. On 20 and 21 December 2007, more than 200 individuals representing some 50 organizations from Mexico and abroad participated in the National Gathering Against Impunity, organized by the Bees in Acteal.

The first day of the Gathering was dedicated to presentations providing analysis of the national political context; highlighting the need for greater networking between organizations and social movements; and outlining the legal context and the need for justice for the assassinations of women and the Acteal case, among others. On the second day, mixed working groups were formed (with the participation of members of the Bees and external organizations) to debate these topics at greater length.

Tragically, Acteal is just one case of injustice and impunity. Many more exist in Mexico today. In line with the arguments made in 2001 and 2002 by UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Dato Param Cumaraswamy, is the Amnesty International report “Laws without Justice: Human rights violations and impunity in the public security and criminal justice system”, published in February 2007. The report claims that “impunity for human rights abuses remains the norm in many states, encouraging public security and criminal justice system officials to resort to abusive practices when carrying out their duties.”

In his speech at the National Gathering Against Impunity, Edgar Cortez, Coordinator of the Network All Rights for Everyone (Red Todos los Derechos para Todos) spoke of impunity as one of the four outstanding factors in Mexico’s current political context, together with increasing militarization, authoritarian convergence (the “iron fist” promised by Calderón), and the criminalization of social protest. Cortez emphasized that impunity is not a new phenomenon, citing the cases of the massacre of students on 2 October 1968, and the Dirty War of the 70’s and 80’s which led to the forced disappearance of more than 500 people. He also spoke of recent cases such as Oaxaca, Atenco, Pasta de Conchos and Lydia Cacho.

In a November interview (published in La Jornada on 1 November 2007), Edgar Cortez was already making reference to the articles which aimed to polarize opinions on the events of Acteal: with those kinds of “stories” told by “officious” spokespeople, the aim is to “allow systematic attacks to be perpetrated against civilians across the country, as has already occurred in Chiapas, Guerrero, Oaxaca and Veracruz, where indigenous communities are displaced, people are tortured, women are raped and executions and forced disappearances are carried out.”

The fact that no resolution has been achieved in such a publicized case as Acteal is bad news in regards to the human rights situation and the level of impunity in Mexico. The Bees are aware of this, and continue in a fight that they know will be a long one: “time and space have given us room to allow our memories and our hearts to fight against the impunity of the Acteal Massacre. We continue to speak up until our voice is heard and until those responsible are punished in accordance with the law” (October 2007).

:: SIPAZ ACTIVITIES

From mid-October 2007 to mid-January 2008

INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE AND ACCOMPANIMENT

PUBLIC RELATIONS

- On 2 November, SIPAZ participated in a meeting with all of the European Union Embassies, held in San Cristóbal de las Casas, Chiapas.

- On 12 November, we attended a meeting with Swiss legislators who formed part of an observation mission coordinated by the Swiss Program for Observation and the Promotion of Peace in Chiapas (Programa Suizo de Observación y Promoción de Paz en Chiapas, PROPAZ). The legislators later met with state and federal authorities.

- On 6 December, we held a meeting with a representative of the political section of the US Embassy.

- At the end of October and again at the beginning of December, SIPAZ made visits to Mexico City. There, we conducted meetings with many of our counterparts, such as the “Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez” Human Rights Center (Centro de Derechos Humanos “Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez”), Services and Consultants for Peace (Servicios y Asesoría para la Paz, Serapaz), the All Rights for Everyone Network, the “Fray Francisco de Vitoria” Human Rights Center (el Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Francisco de Vitoria”) and the National Social Communication Center (el Centro Nacional de Comunicación Social, CENCOS).

CHIAPAS

Highlands (Altos)

- We attended the monthly commemoration of the Acteal Massacre on 22 November, and we also participated in an array of activities organized by the Civil Association, The Bees, held in San Cristóbal de las Casas between November and December in the framework of their campaign “Campaign Against Impunity: 10 and 15” (marking 10 years since the Acteal Massacre and 15 years since the formation of their organization).

- Between 20 and 22 December, SIPAZ participated in the events held as part of the 10th anniversary of the Acteal Massacre, including the National Gathering Against Impunity that took place in Acteal.

Caracoles/The Other Campaign

- We made various visits to the Zapatista Caracoles.

- From 13 to 17 December, SIPAZ attended the international colloquium in memoriam of Andres Aubry co-convened by the EZLN, CIDECI-Unitierra and the Immanuel Wallerstein Center.

- Between 29 December and 1 January, we were present at the Third Gathering Between Zapatistas and the Peoples of the World, also announced as the First Gathering Between Zapatista Women and the Women of the World, “Commander Ramona and the Zapatistas.” The event was held in commemoration of the anniversary of the armed uprising of January 1994 the Caracol of La Garrucha.

OAXACA

In October, we completed a week-long trip to Oaxaca to monitor the situation following the municipal elections. We met with the majority of our counterparts in Oaxaca City. We also attended the events connected to the commemoration of the assassination of Bradley Will (the US journalist killed in October 2006) and the deployment of the Federal Preventive Police (Policía Federal Preventiva, PFP). We were present at the National Meeting on Bilingual Indigenous Education, having established contacts with organizations more closely connected to indigenous communities. We conducted several interviews which are accessible in audio format on our blog (sipaz.wordpress.com, or in English on sipazen.wordpress.com).

GUERRERO

At the beginning of December we traveled to the state of Guerrero. We conducted meetings in Chilpancingo with the State Human Rights Commission (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos, CODDEHUM), Peace Brigades International (PBI), and the Human Rights Network of Guerrero (Red Guerrerense para los Derechos Humanos). In Tlapa we met with various members of the Human Rights Center of la Montaña Tlachinollan to prepare for the international delegation that SIPAZ is organizing for the beginning of March.

INFORMATION

- We received and made presentations to delegations, independent visitors, students and journalists in order to give them a better understanding of the situation in Chiapas and the work conducted by SIPAZ. From 27 December to 4 January we co-coordinated a Global Exchange delegation (a US member of our coalition).

- Since August, we have co-hosted with Center for Economic and Political Research for Community Action (Centro de Investigaciones Económicas y Políticas para la Acción Comunitaria, CIEPAC) and the Community Defenders Network (Red de Defensores Comunitarios) the monthly space for reflection, analysis, debate and contributions known as Speaking Out Loud (“En Voz Alta”, see blogenvozalta.wordpress.com).

- In October we participated in a space for the analysis of the current political situation, hosted by Serapaz and Propaz. Over 80 people attended this event.

PEACE PROMOTION

PEACE EDUCATION

- In October we participated in an ecumenical space for prayer and reflection held 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.

- At the beginning of January we inaugurated a degree program at the Intercultural Mayan Seminary (Seminario Intercultural Mayense), in which we facilitate the subject “Transformation of Conflicts and Human Rights.”

- We are facilitating workshops on conflict transformation with the civil association Economic and Social Development for Indigenous Mexicans (Desarrollo Económico y Social de los Mexicanos Indígenas, DESMI), which works in 17 municipalities within Chiapas.

NETWORKING

- We participated in the monthly meetings of the Chiapas Peace Network (Red por la Paz), a space for action and reflection made up of 16 organizations seeking to support peace processes and reconciliation in Chiapas.

- From 6 to 8 November, we participated in the Gathering of Builders of Peace and Reconciliation convened by the Commission to Support for Unity and Reconciliation (Comisión de Apoyo a la Unidad y la Reconciliación Comunitaria, CORECO) and held at a community in the municipality of Ocosingo.

- On 1 and 2 December, we participated in the Gathering of Promoters of Dialogue and Conflict Transformation (Encuentro de Promotores de Diálogo y Transformación de Conflictos) in Cuernavaca, Morelos, with some 30 individuals working on these issues at a national level. We gave a presentation detailing the experiences of SIPAZ in this field.