:: ANALYSIS
Mexico: growing polarization
The detonator: energy reform
An act of pacific civilian resistance (Source: Blog Lámpara de Diógenes)
 On April 9 President Felipe Calderón’s long-awaited plan for energy reform was finally presented to the Mexican Congress. This initiative aims to revitalize the oil industry, Mexico’s primary source of income, by authorizing greater resources to the state company Pemex, currently suffering a drop in production and lacking resources to explore new deposits. The reform would include modifications to more than a dozen laws, and introduces the concept of “extended services,” which would permit private participation at almost every stage of oil production (exploration, extraction, and refinery of oil and basic petrochemicals).
For some months, the National Democratic Congress (CND, Congreso Nacional Democrático) had announced that it would undertake actions of peaceful civil resistance to avoid what they consider an attempt to privatize the national oil company. The CND is led by former presidential candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) and the Broad Progressive Front (FAP, Frente Amplio Progresista); the latter is a coalition of the country’s principal left-wing parties, the Democratic Revolutionary Party (PRD, Partido de la Revolución Democrática), the Labor Party (PT, Partido del Trabajo) and Convergence (Convergencia).
Photo: FAP deputes take over the Mexican Congress
The first act of civil resistance occurred in the Senate on April 10, when the majority of the FAP’s legislators – in a surprise move – took control of the Senate chambers to demand a genuine debate on the future of the oil company. In the streets, thousands of women united in “brigades of peaceful resistance” and representatives of the Oil Defense Movement surrounded the chambers. From that date onward, the nation’s legislators have met in alternative locations, around which FAP supporters maintain protests. For the first time, mobilizations also occurred in other Mexican states.
 The current polarization, present since the 2006 presidential elections, is not only reflected within the Congress or between the left and the right; it is also evidenced in the heart of the PRD itself. On March 16 elections were held to determine which of two candidates would be the party’s national president. Each candidate represented a strong political line within the PRD: Alejandro Encinas, closely aligned with AMLO, and Jesús Ortega, representing the so-called New Left. Numerous irregularities were reported in the election process, and at the time of writing the results have yet to be released. The two sides seem irreconcilable, as evidenced by the candidates’ differing responses to the energy reform.
Photo: FAP Brigades of Civil Resistance (Source: Blog Lámpara de Diógenes)
Another facet of social discontent: NAFTA’s agricultural chapter
On January 31, a major protest was conducted to demand the renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It is worth recalling that on January 1, 2008, the agricultural chapter of the treaty came into effect, removing tariffs on basic grains such as beans and corn, as well as milk and oil-based products. During the event, which was considered the largest protest held in Mexico against NAFTA, the protesters denounced the initiation of the agricultural chapter as the “coup de grâce” for the Mexican farmer, and warned that if the chapter were not renegotiated there was an imminent risk of a “social uprising.”
In February, some 40 campesino, union and civil society organizations signed the Agreement for Food and Energy Sovereignty, Workers’ Rights and Democratic Freedoms, in which they ratified their unity as sole negotiator with the State. The attempt at dialogue between the federal government and the social organizations ended in March. In a joint communiqué, the organizations of the National Movement associated with the agreement stated that the Calderón Administration only sought dialogue with “like-minded or friendly organizations, in order to coordinate public policy, programs and rural budgets with an eye to the 2009 intermediate elections.” They affirmed that the government had frozen dialogue as “a strategy to weaken the movement.”
In March, the campaign “Without Corn There Is No Country” delivered to the Senate a letter with 438,000 signatures of citizens who support the exclusion of corn and beans from NAFTA. In addition, the signatories urged for the establishment of a permanent mechanism to administrate the import and export of grains, and the prohibition against planting transgenic crops.
© Noé Pineda Arredondo
Another source of dispute: penal reform
In February, Amnesty International reported that several of the proposals approved by the Senate in the matter of penal justice contain “elements that undermine progress achieved in terms of human rights and guarantees, and these areas therefore need to be reviewed and corrected before the bill is approved”. At the same time, the organizations of the National Front Against Repression (FNCR, Frente Nacional Contra la Represión) developed a plan of protests in an attempt to suspend the legislative process of the reform.
The reform has also been questioned by numerous national and international human rights organizations, the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH, Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos) and the ombudsman of the 32 states of Mexico, who coincide in their opinion that the reforms “constitute a step backwards in regards to basic guarantees.”
Towards the end of February, the Commission of Deputies eliminated from the draft bill one of the most questioned proposals, which would have granted the right to search residences without a warrant. However, it has been denounced that the law maintains certain problematic structures, such as arraigo [administrative pre-trial detention]. It is worth noting that the law includes some improvements, such as oral trials and the change from an inquisitory system to an accusatory one (which includes the presumption of innocence). In March, the Senate approved the constitutional reform with the deputies’ modification mentioned above.
Sustained militarization and new denouncements
Denouncements of militarization across Mexico continue to multiply, with the most recent coming from the states of Tamaulipas, Michoacán, Sinaloa and Chihuahua. In the case of Michoacán, the State Human Rights Commission (CEDH, Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos) reported that since the beginning of 2008 it had received 56 complaints, accusing the Mexican army and police forces of “systematically” committing acts of personal violence, pillage and devastation. In Sinaloa at the end of March, the Military Prosecutor was involved in the investigation of 16 soldiers involved in the homicide of four youths in the municipality of Badiraguato.
“Joint Operation Chihuahua,” initiated on March 28, has dispatched approximately 2,500 soldiers and 500 federal agents and Public Ministry personnel to confront a wave of violence, which so far this year has resulted in 231 homicides. The Security Cabinet affirms that within a week of the start of the operation, almost 100 weapons and two tons of drugs had been decommissioned. The Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office announced that it had began an investigation into the incidents which had occurred in the operative, where it had found arbitrary detention, cruel and inhumane treatment, as well as cases of prisoners being held incomunicado and the prevention of visitors from the CNDH from entering military installations.
The Secretariat of National Defense (SEDENA, Secretaría de la Defensa Nacional) warned that members of the Juárez Cartel, whose activities are focused in the state of Chihuahua, plan to conduct “tumultuous” human rights violations by dressing as soldiers and conducting supposed home searches, an action which would undermine the prestige of the Armed Forces. According to SEDENA, “As part of this strategy, the aforementioned organization has been sponsoring marches, sit-ins and pronouncements without any legitimate basis.”
Militarization
Army on the streets until at least 2012
In January, the president of the CNDH José Luis Soberanes met with the new Government Secretary, Juan Camilo Mouriño, to request that the army cease carrying out tasks appropriate for the police force. He insisted that according to national law, the functions served by the armed forces were clearly outlined, as were those to be performed by public security forces.
In February, human rights organizations warned that army participation in security maneuvers was an example of serious deficiencies in regard to respect for individual guarantees. An example of this is the installation of military checkpoints in various locations across the country. Adrían Ramírez, director of the Mexican League for the Defense of Human Rights (LIMEDDH, Liga Mexicana para los Derechos Humanos) considers that the first step to complying with these recommendations should be the suspension of all public security activities: “They are trained to attack the enemy, and here that isn’t the case. Another step would be to make the process of seeking justice more transparent for the relatives of victims [of army actions].” For several human rights organizations, the creation of the General Directorate of Human Rights is insufficient, as the directorate does not have a mandate allowing it to protect individual guarantees due to the discretional nature of war-related information.
In April, the National Network of Civil Human Rights Organizations “All Rights for All” and the Human Rights Center “Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez” reported that with the involvement of the army in public security maneuvers, there has not only been an increase in the human rights violations of the civilian population, but “neither have they achieved greater effectiveness in combating problems caused by drug trafficking.” Since January, however, President Felipe Calderón ordered that the army remain on the streets until at least 2012 in order to continue the task of combating organized crime and drug trafficking.
Human rights briefs
OHCHR Visit
 In early February, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, paid a visit to Mexico. Civil organizations meeting with Arbour presented her with a report on the human rights situation in Mexico noting that, “The document establishes that though the alternating governments in Mexico have advanced formal democracy, they have not brought about substantial change to the human rights situation in the country. The steps taken in terms of human rights have been more for show than anything else.”
At several points the High Commissioner expressed her concern with the insignificant advances made in the investigations of the femicide that continues to occur in Juarez, Chihuahua, as well as the cases of more than 500 disappeared as a result of the dirty war and the criminalization of social protest. She also warned that the army’s participation in policy making is not appropriate in the long run and could even prove dangerous. She also stated that “if the Mexican Army carries out civil or police functions, it should be held accountable to a civil authority.”
Photo: Louise Arbour, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
CNDH: Questions and Reforms
In February, Human Rights Watch (HRW) confirmed that the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) continues to revert to a particular “legal principle which completely distorts and they use it to protect government officials who abuse their authority instead of protecting the victims. In addition, it (the CNDH) has demonstrated a profound indifference towards the international norms it is supposed to be upholding and has acted with diffidence in the Televisa and military jurisdiction cases.” The president of the CNDH refuted the report and argued that it contains inaccurate facts that do not correspond with the reality of the situation.
Similarly, the Congress has discussed a constitutional reform with regard to social guarantees that would have a structural impact not only at the CNDH but within local human right commissions as well. In April, the Congress approved a proposal that excluded several of the initial proposals. Of the 93 proposals set forth, six reforms were decided upon: the securing of the independence of local human right commissions, a constitutional right to life without violence, political jurisdiction and discretion in the hands of the president of the CNDH, respect for human rights within the penitentiary system and the right to education for women.
Atenco
In January, fifteen of the twenty-one law enforcement officials under criminal trial for abuses committed during the police raid at San Salvador Atenco in 2006 were cleared of the charge of abuse of authority, after receiving a federal injunction for the poor integration of the proceedings which the Attorney General of the State of Mexico brought against them.
However, in March the Investigatory Commission of the National Supreme Court of Justice (SCJN, Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación) concluded the first phase of its investigation of the events that took place in Atenco in 2006 and acknowledged the occurrence of “possible serious violations” of individuals’ rights and the coordination of police orders “of a higher level” in the planning of the operation that ended with the deaths of two people and the arrest of some 207 others, of which “only nine left unscathed.” The authorities that are mentioned as having been involved will be notified so that they may present their case. Having completed that step, in a full court session, a resolution will be presented (without any judicial consequences).
Chiapas: continued alarm
In April, the Secretary of the Interior decided to put an end to the Coordination for Dialogue and Negotiation in Chiapas created in 1994 after the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN, Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional) uprising. The decision was made due to the Coordination’s supposed austere nature and lack of necessity. The group Peace with Democracy (Paz con Democracia, consisting of various Mexican personalities and intellectuals) said in February that if a return to the negotiating table (suspended in 1995) is improbable, there would be a “new escalation in the war in Chiapas.” A few days prior, before the intensification of aggressions “towards peoples, nations and tribes,” the National Indigenous Congress (CNI, Congreso Nacional Indígena) had also declared itself in opposition to the hostilities towards Zapatista communities in Chiapas “that in recent months has intensified due to paramilitary organizations such as the Organization for the Defense of Indigenous and Campesino Rights (OPDDIC, Organización para la Defensa de los Derechos Indígenas y Campesinos).”
The aggressions and threats of forced eviction have been made in various ejidos, communities and municipalities including Ch’oles de Tumbalá, Huitepec, Bolom Ajaw, Chilón and Agua Azul among others. Peace and Democracy denounced “The episodes of robbery, the burning of houses, deaths, death threats, property evictions, one after another. They are trying to strip the rebel communities of their lands and territories.”
In addition, there are contradictory statements being made at different levels of government. While some mayors have announced the forced eviction of Zapatista communities and territories, the state government has called on the municipal presidents to respect “all expressions” and act through dialogue and tolerance “whatever the situation presented in the municipalities is.” The state has also made clear its intention to dismantle the OPDDIC. In April, more than one thousand campesinos from the ejido Nazareth in the municipality of Ocosingo, reiterated their resignation and total departure from the paramilitary organization.
In a more general sense, in February, the Internacional Civil Commission for Human Rights Observation (CCIODH, Comisión Civil Internacional de Observación de Derechos Humanos) pointed out that throughout the current administration in Chiapas “the police agencies still proceed with the arrest of innocent people as a result of false criminal reporting, in collaboration with paramilitary groups; they make charges based on events that never happened; they instigate self-incrimination through torture and then process individuals on that basis. All of this is taking place within criminal trials that are replete with irregularities.”
CCIODH Press Conference in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, February 3, 2008
IMMIGRATION: Failed subject at the northern and southern borders
Social organizations and federal legislators have stated that the persecution, harassment and human rights violations of Mexican immigrants have increased at the border with the United States. In addition, the strengthening of the immigration policies in the US has made the situation even harder for Mexican migrants along with the effects of the recession, continuing xenophobia and the strengthening of laws that require whole families to return to Mexico. In 2007 513,014 Mexicans were deported, more than 400 each day.
In late February, the proposition Zero Tolerance also known as “Do Not Pass” was put into effect in El Paso, Texas. The measure will initiate legal actions against those immigrants that repeatedly attempt to cross the border illegally. Those who are caught in subsequent attempts will be imprisoned for up to five years and fined up to $500 USD. In addition to the opposition heard from civil groups, in March, the representative from the Organization of American States in Mexico, Oscar Maúrtua de Romaña, criticized the program.
In March, The Special Rapporteur to the United Nations for the Rights of Immigrants, Jorge Bustamante, paid a working visit to Mexico. In ending his trip he stated that the human rights of immigrants are violated at a higher proportion in Mexico than those suffered by Mexican immigrants in the United States.
:: ARTICLE
Detainee protest highlights serious faults in the Chiapas justice system
Between February and April, a historic protest was conducted by detainees who revindicated their status as political prisoners and asked for their immediate release. The protest was held in various prisons in Chiapas and one in Tabasco, and took the form of an “indefinite” hunger strike or fast (until the prisoners regained their freedom). It was backed by both relatives of the detainees and numerous social organizations, who supported the detainees through diverse actions. Expressions of solidarity also arrived from other Mexican states and abroad.
The protest began on February 12, when Zacario Hernández Hernández initiated an indefinite hunger strike to demand his freedom. A member of the Catholic organization “Pueblo Creyente” [Believing People], Hernández Hernández had been in detention since 2003 in Center for Social Readaptation (CERESO) #14 in Cintalapa, known as “El Amate. Two others detained in the same case (that of “Tres Cruces”) joined him in fasting and prayer. On March 25, both detainees joined the hunger strike.
Supporting these demands, the Pueblo Creyente of the Diocese of San Cristóbal de Las Casas mobilized in a pilgrimage of thousands who called for the liberation of all those who were unfairly incarcerated.
Between February 25 and 26, another 13 detainees from CERESO #14, seven of whom belonged to the organization the “Voice of El Amate” (follower of The Other Campaign), four self-identified Zapatista militants, and one from Independent Coordination of Indigenous and Campesino Organizations (CIOAC, Central Independiente Obrera Agrícola y Campesina) made the decision to join the hunger strike. Another two detainees from the “Voice of El Amate” and one from CIOAC began a fast.
The protest spread to other Chiapas prisons between March 4 and 10: in CERESO #5 in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, nine detainees and members of the organization the “Voice of Los Llanos,” also a follower of The Other Campaign, began a hunger strike, while six other members, together with a female detainee from the community of Busiljá, began fasting. In CERESO #17 in Playas de Catazajá, in the state’s north, eight detainees – among them Zapatista militants and members of the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD, Partido de la Revolución Democrática – also undertook a hunger strike. On March 24, two detainees in the Municipal Public Prison of Tacotalpa, Tabasco, residents of the Northern Zone of Chiapas and recognized as Zapatista militants, began fasting and prayer.
The majority of the protesting detainees were indigenous, predominantly of Tseltal or Tsotsil origin. Some had already been jailed for 10 years, and all reported that because of their political activities they were arbitrarily detained on fabricated charges, in violation of their right to judicial guarantees.
he first results of the protest came with the liberation of Zacario Hernández Hernández – already on his 35th day of hunger strike – together with four other detainees of “El Amate.” The Chiapas government declared that “in Chiapas no one is persecuted for their political beliefs, and for those who have been in the past, their case files will be examined to corroborate or refute their alleged guilt"(1). Subsequently, the government stated that 360 case files would be reviewed by the Interinstitutional Working Group [Mesa Interinstitucional], according to the dictates of the Suspended Sentence Law(2).
To coincide with the protest within the prison walls, on March 24 relatives and friends of hunger-striking detainees began a sit-in at the entry to the Chiapas State Government Offices in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, reiterating the call for their freedom. They vowed to maintain the sit-in until all prisoners were released.
Following a public event within the government offices on March 31, 2008, 137 prisoners were released from various Chiapas penitentiaries. Thirty of these had been participating in the hunger strike or fast in CERESOs #5, #14 and #17, while 13 remained behind bars on hunger strike, and two continued their fast.
Those who were freed declared in a press release, “We are political prisoners and prisoners of conscience as a result of the government and its unjust laws which have charged us with fabricated crimes. We were charged with these crimes in response to our organized struggle for the needs of our people.”
Samuel Ruiz García, Bishop Emeritus of San Cristóbal de Las Casas, published a letter on April 4 in which he expressed his concern for the health of the hunger strikers. As a result, the remaining detainees suspended their protest and the sit-in was removed. As President of the Fray Bartolome de Las Casas Human Rights Center (Frayba), Samuel Ruiz affirmed that the Center would accompany the revision of case files that had been promised by the state government.
Sit-in of relatives of political prisoners, Chiapas State Government Offices, Tuxtla- Gutiérrez
On April 24, the two Chiapas residents detained in Tacotalpa (Tabasco) – Ángel Concepción Pérez Gutiérrez and Francisco Pérez Vázquez – were moved to Chiapas and are currently being detained in CERESO #12 in Yajalón. They had initiated a second protest, a hunger strike, on April 21. The Chiapas State Government made the commitment of reviewing their case which, since their detention on July 9, 1996, has been riddled with irregularities.
In an interview with SIPAZ, the lawyer Diego Cadenas Gordillo, Director of Defense at Frayba, highlighted serious faults in the justice system, which permit arbitrary and/or politically motivated detentions. These include the defendant’s need to be attended by a trained lawyer and not merely a person whom they trust (as stated in the Mexican Constitution); the lack of an interpreter for those whose mother tongue is not Spanish, as in the case of many indigenous defendants; and the need to eliminate the “principle of immediacy,” which attributes greater evidentiary value to the defendant’s first testimony, despite the fact that many have reported that they suffered torture at that time(3).
In general, as has been stated by several human rights organizations such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the lack of independence and impartiality in the legal system creates inaccuracies, abuses and manipulations in its application(4). The Chiapas State Government has yet to offer concrete proposals to remedy these grave failings.
Notes:
- Article in Cuarto Poder, 19/03/2008
- Article in Cuarto Poder, 22/03/2008
- The Spanish video and English transcript of the interview with Diego Cadenas are available at SIPAZ's Blog
- Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR), Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Mexico, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.100, Doc. 7, rev. 1, September 24, 1998. Par. 367.
:: FOCUS
SIPAZ International Delegation to Guerrero: Conclusions
“Some indigenous peoples have risen up in arms [Chiapas, 1994]. We have done nothing but raise our voices and still the government considers it a crime.”
–Xochistlahuaca, Guerrero
The delegation with members of the OPIM (Organization of the Me’phaa Indigenous Peoples)
According to the socioeconomic indicators of the National Population Council (CONAPO, Consejo Nacional de Población), Chiapas, Oaxaca and Guerrero delineate a triangle of extreme poverty in Mexico. Unfortunately, this is not the only factor that these three states have in common: they are also characterized by discrimination, racism, impunity, militarization, and repeated human rights violations.
With this commonality as a starting point, since 2004 the International Service for Peace (SIPAZ) has extended its base of operations (initiated in Chiapas in 1995) to include the neighboring states of Oaxaca and Guerrero. In Chiapas SIPAZ has learned that international attention can decrease the level of direct violence experienced by communities or individuals in resistance. Additionally, this attention puts pressure on federal and state governments, increasing the political cost of their repressive acts, and urging them to reduce the violence of a given situation.
After many visits to Guerrero made by SIPAZ members in the last three years, the team decided to open up to others the possibility of experiencing firsthand the state’s political and social situation. Such an introduction would give individuals enough information to formulate a cogent political response. Accordingly, SIPAZ coordinated an international delegation to Guerrero between March 7 and 14, 2008. Representatives of 11 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) from the United States, Austria, France, Sweden, Switzerland, and Latin America participated in the delegation, offering their ample experience in the fields of human rights, peace and social conflict.
Although the delegation couldn’t travel to all areas of the state, many disturbing tendencies were observed including: the persistence of serious human rights violations, as well as the risk of increasing violence in light of continuing impunity, militarization and criminalization of social protest.
Principle concern: “criminalization of social protest?”
Although the government officials SIPAZ interviewed do not recognize the validity of the term “criminalization of social protest,” it was repeatedly mentioned by social organizations in their interviews and meetings with the delegation. Moreover, they spoke of threats, detentions (including mass arrests both during and after demonstrations), and arrest warrants or legal proceedings against their leaders. In La Parota, for example, testimonies of this sort are common: “Some of our compañeros were in jail. We were defending what is ours, our human rights. That has been our great crime.”
A representative of the Normal Rural School of Ayotzinapa told SIPAZ, “On November 14, we were defending our rights in a sit-in in front of Congress, when we were forcibly removed. We were supposed to have met with the deputies but they sent in repressive forces. […] On November 30, they engaged in a second repressive act. We were in the tollbooth, handing out flyers on the issues we have raised, and again they sent in repressive forces. We withdrew from the booth and at the same time they advanced on us. They grabbed us, hit us and took us to the attorney general. They arrested us for making attacks on the highway, disturbing the peace and robbery.”
One member of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Guerrero (APPG, Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Guerrero), described the framework of these repressive acts: “One of the precedents is the fact that Lucio Cabañas [leader of a former guerrilla group in Guerrero] attended this school. Before the repression, the Secretary of Education had already linked the students of Ayotzinapa with guerrilla groups. That was a very controversial declaration. From that point on, the surveillance and repression has been constant. They issued arrest warrants for us. In fact, almost all of the social activists in Guerrero have a warrant out for their arrest: for rioting, sabotage, attacks on the highways or sedition, as if they were terrorists.”
The president of the Guerrero State Human Rights Commission (CODDEHUM Comisión de Defensa de los Derechos Humanos), Juan Alarcón Hernández, pointed out that “They refer to human rights defenders as criminals. As per the constitution and international conventions, everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. The government engages in repressive acts to intimidate the people and put an end to social movements. However, civil organizations continue to protest and hold demonstrations. [The state’s response] has been excessive and has not proven effective.”
The Secretary of Government, Armando Chavarría, emphasized, “We are a democratic government, stemming from the popular will of the people of Guerrero, […] and we have tried to conduct ourselves with respect towards the citizenry. The problem is that in a context of struggle the rights of third parties are violated. We find ourselves at a crossroads, in a dilemma as to how to act. In exceptional cases, we have had to apply the letter of the law, up to the point of using security forces. I mention this so you can better understand the circumstances. We have always prioritized a policy of dialogue.”
Room for dialogue: contrasting versions
Once again, there are differing versions as to the possibilities of dialogue. The Secretary General of Government in Guerrero, in his interview with the SIPAZ delegation, affirmed, “At this same table we have carried out hundreds of meetings with social organizations. There is always a willingness to arrive at an agreement. We have different points of view, yes. This does not create a problem for us. We understand that the people are unsatisfied.” However, the social organizations have pointed out the government’s closed attitude when presented with their demands.
Within the framework of an assembly created in the region in August 2007, an agreement was signed between the Council of Ejidos and Communities in Opposition to La Parota (CECOP, Consejo de Ejidos y Comunidades en Oposición a La Parota) and the Cahuatepec authorities in which they ratified a “no” vote to the construction of the hydroelectric dam. The next day however, the authorities chose not to ratify the agreement. According to CECOP, “Ever since then, the government refuses to recognize this assembly and acts as if it has never existed. Instead, [we] propose a new consultation with the support of the UN and the CNDH. The August assembly is legally valid, something the government refuses to accept.”
La Parota
Another representative of the CECOP added, “At this stage, who is going to believe that they’ll conduct a real investigation? Those who can make the decision, the campesinos, have already done so: it’s not going to happen. Yesterday they announced that they were going to conduct an audit at the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE, Comisión Federal de Electricidad) to learn how much they had spent in their attempt to impose the dam project. They’ve built roads and handed out medicines, neither of which is part of their role. They continue to give funding, including planting trees in areas that will eventually be flooded if they build the dam. Before, there was no support for anyone. Now, all of a sudden, they want to ‘help’ us and if someone opposes them, they begin to persecute them. Many have been imprisoned, there have been two deaths. We will not allow one more death, one more imprisonment.”
La Parota
Background: impunity and militarization
“Not all the rapes have been reported, because there is no guarantee that a judge will hear the case, and even less that anyone will be convicted.”
– Organization of the Me’phaa Indigenous Peoples (OPIM, Organización del Pueblo Indígena Me’phaa), Ayutla
When faced with human rights issues, the state government highlights the difficulty of proceeding without crimes being reported. The Secretary General of Government insisted, “I have asked the NGOs and the social organizations to present the corresponding reports. Until now, what we have are not reports of crimes but declarations to the media stating that violations are being committed, that there is mistreatment, that [the government displays] an inappropriate attitude. […] But I repeat that we do not have the necessary elements to act. […] Certainly there have been human rights violations. No country has escaped that. However, when the CODDEHUM or the CNDH have sent us recommendations, we have responded.”
On the other hand, several social organizations told SIPAZ of the context of impunity that has continued since the “dirty war” (during the 1960’s and 1970’s) as is the case of those forcibly disappeared. According to Abel Barrera, director of the Tlachinollan Human Rights Centre of the Montaña (CDH Tlachinollan), “since the 70’s the armed struggle brought a burden of more than 500 forcibly disappeared people across the state. It is a wound that has not been able to heal, a factor that weighs on people until today.”
This situation of impunity cannot be viewed as pertaining to the past when one considers the cases of women raped by the army in the Ayutla region (cases that were presented in 2002 and have yet to be solved). Given the continuing impunity and the discrediting of state entities implicated in the administration of justice, many victims choose not to report crimes, preferring to bring their cases before the public opinion, or report to federal or international institutions.
Another factor repeated by activists is the intense militarization, justified as part of the battle against drug trafficking. According to some social organizations, this has merely been a pretext. Abel Barrera of CDH Tlachinollan emphasized, “The Montaña of Guerrero is the country’s primary location of poppy crops. Guerrero is among the most militarized, most drug influenced, most violent and poorest states in the country. However, the government’s responses primarily demonstrate a vision of security and militarism. The violence has been normalized and continues to provide a ‘justification’ for the use of ‘state violence.’ The government is not addressing the structural causes behind the drug violence. They automatically resort to an armed response, when that is not the method that should be used in resolving this problem.”
In their final statement, the international delegation concluded that “the authorities should recognize that the solution to this serious situation lies in the creation of job opportunities that allow the people to live in a dignified manner, not militarization.”
Extreme poverty should not be an excuse
 Throughout the tour of Guerrero, the delegation witnessed and heard of the extreme economic, political and social marginalization that the majority of the state finds itself in, especially in regions with a majority indigenous presence. Of particular concern are the issues of health, education, nutrition, housing and dignified employment. For example, 96% of the indigenous population of Guerrero does not have access to adequate health services, due to a lack of hospitals with qualified personnel and basic equipment. The Montaña region has one general hospital and two ambulances to attend around 400,000 people (see SIPAZ's Website). While the delegation recognizes the challenges that poverty carries with it, it is unacceptable that the state government blame its lack of promotion and defense of human rights on this situation.
Photo: Amuzgo woman, Xochistlahuaca (Costa Chica)
Given their poverty, many people from Guerrero consider migration the only option for survival, which in itself is not a solution. Guerrero is the number one state in terms of migration rates within Mexico, and number five in terms of international migration rates.
Many are aware of the risks involved in illegal immigration to the United States, not only in the border crossing, but also in daily life once they arrive. However, immigration continues to be strong: approximately 73,000 people from Guerrero immigrate to the United States every year. More than 950,000 people from Guerrero, both undocumented and nationalized, live on “the other side.”
 The delegation heard testimonies on the inhumane conditions experienced by agricultural day laborers who leave their homes for temporary work in Mexico’s northern states. For example, in Chiepetepec, an ex-day laborer told us, “There, though it’s hard, you don’t die of hunger the way you do here. Here, if you don’t die of hunger, you’ll die of some disease because there is no money. Over there, they pay very little. They treat us badly, there are insults and mistreatment. The company does not comply with its obligations. For example, they’ll call a doctor, but there’s no medicine. […] Sometimes I sleep two hours per night, sometimes I eat once a day. It is very difficult but it is also a good thing because it helps us get out of poverty, more or less. Thank God we were able to get the money and buy land [in Chiepetepec] and build a house.”
Photo: Interview with Radio Ñomndaa at Xochistlahuaca (Costa Chica)
Risks of increasing violence and construction of alternatives
In the end, given the previous experience of many delegates in Chiapas and Oaxaca, the delegation left Guerrero expressing fear that the limitations to dialogue would lead social actors to struggle through violent means. In all cases, several points were echoed: divisions, polarization and a deterioration of the social fabric. For example, in Ayutla de los Libres, the delegation received reports of paramilitary activities: “In the communities there are individuals, dressed as civilians, who want to divide the people. They’re indigenous people, too. The government seeks these divisions in order to claim that indigenous people are fighting among themselves, so they must intervene. There are many problems with paramilitary groups.”
The delegation expressed concern at the risk that power struggles and general conflict would increase in the context of elections later this year. The delegates concluded, “we do not consider the situation in Guerrero as separate from our own realities. In fact we feel in part responsible, as we consider the poverty seen here - part of a broader context of structural violence which is intensified by the neoliberal policies implemented by our countries.”
:: SIPAZ ACTIVITIES
Mid-January to mid-April 2008
INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE AND ACCOMPANIMENT
PUBLIC RELATIONS
- On January 25, SIPAZ met with the political attaché of the French Embassy, which currently holds the presidency of the European Union.
- In early February, SIPAZ participated in a meeting in Mexico City with Louise Arbour, the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations.
- En April SIPAZ attended a meeting with Juan Sabines Guerrero, governor of Chiapas, and members of his cabinet. The team expressed its concerns in regards to the sociopolitical and human rights situations faced in Chiapas, focusing particularly on the prisoners who carried out a hunger strike in February and March.
CHIAPAS
Northern Zone (Zona Norte)
- Between March 6 and 12, SIPAZ was present in several communities and towns in the Northern Region of Chiapas. Team members conducted interviews with several actors in the region: displaced people, leaders of various political groups, governmental entities, religious leaders, and Zapatista communities including the Good Government Council at Roberto Barrios. SIPAZ visited the Zapatista community of Ch’oles de Tumbalá, near Palenque, which was originally displaced in a violent eviction in 2006 and is still subject to threats.
Highlands (Altos)
- SIPAZ attended the monthly commemoration of the Acteal Massacre on February 22.
- On three occasions in February, SIPAZ visited the Zapatista Community Ecological Reserve, located near San Cristóbal de Las Casas in the same territory occupied by the Protected Natural Area Huitepec-Los Alcanfores subsequently created by the Chiapas government. According to reports, the local population was not consulted about the creation of the government sponsored natural area but rather threatened with eviction.
Selva (Jungle)
- On February 24 and 25, SIPAZ was present at the Gathering of Organizations and Indigenous Communities in Defense of Territory, Culture and Natural Resources in the Lacandon Jungle in Betania (the Cañadas of Ocosingo) as observers. Residents of more than one hundred ejidos and communities attended.
Caracoles/The Other Campaign
- SIPAZ conducted at least one visit to each of the five Zapatista Caracoles.
Miscellaneous
- SIPAZ members acted as observers at the Pilgrimage of the Pueblo Creyente in San Cristóbal de Las Casas on February 19, in which more than 10,000 people participated.
- The SIPAZ team also observed an event held against the privatization of PEMEX, called by the National Democratic Convention (Convención Nacional Democrática) and the Broad Progressive Front (Frente Amplio Progresista) in Mexico City on March 18.
- Members of the team observed the picket maintained at the entry of the State Government Offices in Tuxtla Gutiérrez by the family members of the hunger-striking prisoners. They also atended the event “Freedom to see justice done,” in which the state government freed 137 people detained in various prisons in Chiapas.
OAXACA
In mid-February, SIPAZ conducted a one-week trip to Oaxaca. Interviews were conducted with most of our counterparts in Oaxaca City. The team visited David Venegas and Adán Mejía, members of the APPO imprisoned in Ixcotel Penitentiary. Several interviews were conducted with detainees which were later published in SIPAZ’s Spanish-language blog (sipaz.wordpress.com). A meeting was held with the Attorney General of the State of Oaxaca with regards to these prisoners.
GUERRERO
Between March 7 and 14, SIPAZ coordinated an international delegation conformed by 11 representatives of NGOs in the United States, France, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland and Latin America. The delegation covered several areas of the state of Guerrero (Costa Chica, Montaña and Chilpancingo; see this report’s Focus).
INFORMATION
- SIPAZ received, and gave 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 the organization. Between March 14 and 21, SIPAZ coordinated a delegation of students from Siena College, New York.
- At the beginning of February, SIPAZ met with the VI International Civil Commission for Human Rights Observation during its visit to Mexico. In both Chiapas and Oaxaca the organizations exchanged information about the current situation in these states.
- In an endeavor that began late last year, SIPAZ has co-hosted with the 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 Spanish-language blogenvozalta.wordpress.com).
- In mid-February, a member of the SIPAZ team traveled to Washington. In a meeting held at the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), a presentation was given on the human rights and sociopolitical situation in Chiapas and Oaxaca. A meeting was subsequently held with members of the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL).
- At the beginning of April, a SIPAZ team member began a speaker’s tour in the United States, specifically around Chicago and the state of California.
PEACE PROMOTION
PEACE EDUCATION
- In February and March SIPAZ 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 is a member.
- In February, SIPAZ facilitated a course in “Conflict Transformation and Human Rights” which is part of a degree program at the Intercultural Mayan Seminary (Seminario Intercultural Mayense).
NETWORKING
- SIPAZ 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. On April 10 and 11, the Peace Network together with local organizations called the First Gathering of Alternative Grassroots Processes in Border Region III, with the participation of approximately 200 people in the community of Laguna Larga, municipality of Comitán.
- Between January 22 and 26, SIPAZ attended various activities associated with human rights and indigenous communities which were held as part of the World Social Forum-Mexico Section in the Zócalo of Mexico City.
- On February 22 and 23, SIPAZ participated in the Gathering of CMC-Holland with its counterparts in Chiapas and Mexico. The topic was “Respect and protection of the human rights of indigenous and marginalized communities.”
:: New documents on the SIPAZ website
|
