:: ANALYSIS
Mexico: human rights and security, an impossible puzzle?
On February 10th, Mexico was evaluated by the United Nations Human Rights Council as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).
The results (see the Focus in this report) have not resolved the crux of the tension between the promotion and defense of human rights, and the clear option taken by the present government since its beginning. For example, on December 12, during the presentation of the National Human Rights Prize, President Felipe Calderón stated that “the main challenge for human rights in Mexico comes from the impunity of criminals and the limitation of the security and justice institutions in the country, or from the frank inability to stop the impunity”. The government perspective focuses entirely on public security, clearly threatened by the growing power of drug-traffickers and organized crime in the country.
On the other hand, the human rights organizations start from a much wider understanding of the growing militarization in Mexico, which is part of the government strategy to fight the drug cartels, and represents a great threat to the human rights of the civil society.
Photo: Campaign “To protest is a right, to suppress is a crime” - © Frayba
On March 20, six Mexican civil organizations, before the Inter-American Human Rights Commission (IAHRC), presented a report which showed that the number of complaints against the Mexican Army regarding human rights violations was six times higher during the first two years of the government of Calderón. The number of complaints (illegal searches, arbitrary detentions, sexual violations, torture, and in 28 cases, death) which the National Commission on Human Rights (CNDH) received against the Department of National Defense (Sedena) had grown from 182 in 2006 to 1,230 in 2008.
Juan Carlos Gutiérrez Contreras of the Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights, AC (CMDPDH) explained: “We have come to this commission to demonstrate the collateral damage that the involvement of the armed forces in the fight against drug-trafficking implies. (…) Part of the problem is that complaints are almost never investigated or are brought before military courts, where the Army becomes the judge, and the impunity continues”. According to the report, in the last two years, the Military Prosecutors Office has indicted less than one out of every 10 open cases against soldiers who have committed crimes against civilians. In addition, there have been no convictions for violations of human rights during the present administration.
In February, the Brigadier General Jaime Antonio López Portillo, the director of Human Rights of the Department of National Defense (Sedena), dismissed these concerns, stating that the behavior of the Armed Forces regarding human rights “is acceptable”, and in spite of the increased military presence in the fight against organized crime (45,000 soldiers deployed daily) “there were few” complaints against soldiers the year before. NGOs rejected his comments by stating that there are no “acceptable” levels when dealing with human rights violations.
One factor which could increase the confusion is the fact that last year and regularly since February of this year, there have been popular protests in various northern states demanding the exit of the Military from public security duties. Nevertheless, various media groups have linked the protests to organized crime, claiming that the buses that the protesters arrived in had been rented and that there was proof that the protesters had been paid.
The militarization in the country is not only related to the deployment of the Army, but also the naming of military members to civil posts or the fact that the National Defense Department has demanded that the states increase the firepower of their police institutions, create or strengthen special anti-kidnapping units, and finance many different public security projects.
Photo: Activity carried out the day the Cerezo brothers were liberated - © SIPAZ
The results of the war on drugs remain low to date, in comparison with the human and financial resources that have been invested. According to the Undersecretary for North America of the Department of External Relations, Carlos Rico, Mexico has spent 6.3 billion dollars in the past 2 years fighting organized crime.
A number of media groups have noted that although the Federal Government has claimed in commercials to have detained thousands of presumed criminals, they only manage to bring a few of them to trial. For example, in 2008, only 17% of those detained for public health crimes (drug charges) were brought before a judge. On the other hand, at the end of February, the head of the Attorney General’s Office (PGR), Eduardo Medina Mora, claimed that Operation Clean-up, implemented during the second half of 2008 in order to purge the infiltration of drug traffickers in public security and Federal justice institutions, had concluded with the detention of 25 high officials. This appears to be very limited, when in its annual human rights report, a document that can be considered very conservative, the United States Department of State stated that “impunity and corruption at all levels of government” exists in Mexico, and that a wide range of abuses have been committed against individual guarantees.
International support of the government strategy
As a result of the many human rights violations and the limited results of the war on drugs, a number of countries have pledged to support the government plan to fight organized crime. At the end of the year, as part of the Merida Initiative, the US decided to offer 99 million dollars to Mexico for equipment and technology for the Army and the public security institutions. The amount was less than the promised 116.5 million dollars announced by the Department of External Relations on December 16. In the middle of January, Barack Obama, the President of the US, met with Felipe Calderón. They agreed on the importance of strengthening the bilateral alliance in economic issues, but mostly in terms of security. The US has repeatedly expressed its concern with the growing violence resulting from the war between the Mexican Government and the drug trafficking organizations. As a result of this and the growing economic crisis, the amount of money approved for the Merida Initiative in 2009 was reduced from 450 million dollars to 300 million.
At the beginning of March, Michael G. Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Military Chiefs of Staff of the US, visited Mexico at the end of a tour of Latin America in which he left clear that for him, Plan Colombia was the model for cooperation between the US and Mexico. In addition, in December, Guatemala proposed a regional militarization in order to fight against organized crime, which was also discussed as part of the Regional Summit in January. At this summit, the Common Front for the fight against Drug-trafficking and Terrorism was formed between Colombia, Panama, Mexico, and Guatemala.
ATENCO: A lost opportunity for the Mexican justice system
Liberty and Justice Campaign for Atenco - © SIPAZ
In February, a discussion began regarding the report issued by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) about the case of Atenco. In spite of the major limitations that derived from the regulations approved by the government in this case, the process had generated major expectations.
The investigation clearly affirmed that in San Salvador Atenco, Mexico State, in May of 2006, hundreds of people suffered abuses and were severely deprived of individual and constitutional rights “to life, personal safety, sexual freedom, gender equality, privacy of their homes, personal freedom, due process, fair treatment of prisoners, and the right to justice.” In addition it established that 2,726 public servants were involved and that their actions were “justified” but “excessive, disproportionate, inefficient, and indolent.”
Nevertheless, the majority of the ministers of the SCJN concluded by condemning as responsible only those police officers who used cruel methods or sexual abuse, as well as the Federal and State level leaders of the operation who permitted the abuses. However the governor of the State of Mexico, the federal secretary of Public Security, and other high level authorities were exonerated of any responsibility.
The International Civil Commission for the Observation of Human Rights (CCIODH) lamented that the report of the SCJN “ended the possibility of justice and contributed once again to the impunity with which the State responds to serious human rights violations, violations which paradoxically have been widely documented by the Court in its investigation”.
After the report of the SCJN, the National and International Campaign for Liberty and Justice for Atenco began. It seeks to involve the civil society in order to pressure the 3 branches of government for the freedom of the 13 prisoners linked to the case of Atenco, their exoneration, punishment for those responsible, as well as ending the criminalization of social protest.
CHIAPAS: the principal conflicts and the present problems
Denunciations of harassments against Zapatista communities continue in two main forms: on one hand, police and military harassment (mainly in the Central and Highland zones in recent months), and on the other hand, aggressions by local groups. At the end of February, the Good Government Council (JBG) at the Zapatistas Central Core base in Front of the World (Oventik) denounced military incursions close to the Caracol, and flyovers of airplanes and helicopters in the region.
In addition, they signaled that indigenous and campesino groups, linked to local powers or the state government, are seeking to wear down the resistance through aggression that could end in violence, such as: occupation of land, robbery or destruction of harvests, etc. The organization most noted in the Northern Jungle continues being the Organization for the Defense of Indigenous and Campesino Rights (Opddic). However, the most recent conflicts have been with the Regional Organization of Coffee-producers of Ocosingo (ORCAO). Noticeably, during the time in which the Festival of Justified Rage was held by the EZLN in Oventik and San Cristobal, members of the ORCAO tried to evict a group of indigenous Zapatistas from 500 hectares of land located in Bosque Bonito (Zapatista autonomous municipality of Che Guevara), resulting in a confrontation which left 5 people injured. At the beginning of March, the JBG of La Realidad denounced that members of the PRD party and members of the Independent Center of Agricultural Workers and Campesinos (CIOAC) of the municipality of Las Margaritas carried out a series of aggressions and provocations against Zapatista support bases located on the ranch of Espiritu Santo. While the names change, the strategy of confrontation against indigenous groups has stayed the same.
Photo: An Antinarco operation in a Chiapas community
© Frayba (Yorail Maya)
Another series of conflicts, related to the “ecotourism centers”, exists in the zone between Ocosingo and Palenque where the Federal and State government have planned projects of tourism development. A number of indigenous communities have sought to retake control of their traditional land rights in Agua Clara, Misol Há, Agua Azul, and other locations.
Other problems are related to the status of Chiapas as a border state. In the middle of January, the Human Rights Center Fray Bartolomé de las Casas (CDHFBLC) condemned an “unjustified” attack by state police in San Cristobal against a group of undocumented immigrants of distinct nationalities, which left a toll of 3 dead and 8 wounded. They denounced that the undocumented immigrants who were captured, were jailed under conditions which violated their rights after being taken to the jail for persons considered probably responsible for a crime.
Photo: Gathering of the “Mama Corral” Zapatista women - © SIPAZ
In February, a group of Central American civil organizations calculated that there have been 800 disappearances of migrants passing through Mexico and they announced the creation of a delegation to investigate their disappearances. At first the Mexican migration officials refused to allow the observers to enter.
Briefs on Oaxaca and Guerrero
As part of the UPR, after almost two years since the conflict took place in Oaxaca, local civil organizations put together a report about the situation of human rights in the state, in which they denounced the impunity, the absence of a judicial response, and the systematic violation of human rights which continues to date. It dealt with advances and problems in the following areas: criminalization of social protest, violations of freedom of expression and the vulnerability of journalists, forced disappearances, violence against women, aggressions against human rights defenders, and the violation of the rights of indigenous peoples.
APPO’s Second Ordinary State Congress - © SIPAZ
One of the most discussed cases in recent months, where there seems to be a desire for “justice”, is that of Juan Manual Martínez Moreno, accused of the killing of the US independent journalist Brad Will, who was killed during the social conflict of 2006. Nevertheless, civil and social organizations, as well as the family of Will, have ruled out the possibility that Martínez Moreno is guilty and have mobilized in his favor in various ways. They claim that his detention was suspiciously sped up as part of the negotiations related to the Merida Initiative. Although there are various rumors circulating about the death of Brad Will, the National Commission for Human Rights (CNDH) has publically discounted the government theory. However Martínez Moreno was still detained. He was granted an appeal for legal protection on January 20, but it was overturned by the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) at the beginning of February.
Two other recent cases which seem to illustrate the tendency for more selective attacks (certainly more familiar for observers of the low intensity warfare which we have seen in Chiapas) was the attack on the home of the director of “El Correo de Oaxaca”, as well as the attempted homicide against Ruben Valencia, member of VOCAL (Oaxacan Voices Building Autonomy and Liberty, part of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca- APPO).
In spite of the aggressions and the fear after the repression, at the end of February, the APPO held it’s Second Congress by convoking neighborhoods, communities, and collectives to organize assemblies, gather its social base, and reorganize the APPO. Among the accords was a clear refusal to recognize any level of government, with which they will only negotiate freedom for prisoners.
In the case of Guerrero, there have been multiple denunciations of forced disappearances which in a matter of days turned from denunciations of incarceration or worse, to death. The paradigmatic example is that of the indigenous Mixteco leaders, Raúl Lucas Lucía and Manuel Ponce Rosas, human rights defenders from the Costa Chica. Their bodies were found on February 22 in Ayutla de los Libres with signs of torture. It had been denounced that they were abducted by armed men who claimed to be police at a public event on February 13 in the municipal seat.
Photo: Cultural Week put on by APPO - © SIPAZ
On March 18, an appeal for legal protection was granted to 4 of the 5 members of the Indigenous Me’phaa People’s Organization (OPIM), who have been incarcerated in the municipality of Ayutla de los Libres since April 17 of 2008.
Kerrie Howard, the Americas Deputy Director of Amnesty International stated: “The pattern of killings, attacks, threats, and detentions of human rights defenders in Ayutla has made the region very dangerous for those who defend the rights of the indigenous communities which are the most marginalized in Mexico”.
“National Convention of Municipal Committees of the legitimate government of Mexico”: another organizing force on the national level
On March 22, in Mexico City, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), the ex-presidential candidate, led the first “National Convention of Municipal Committees of the legitimate government of Mexico”, in which more than 12 thousand representatives participated. They were invited in order to strengthen the local institutions looking forward to the electoral process of 2012, and to continue to organize for the promotion and defense of the right to vote. Among other goals, there is the objective of gathering, from now until March of 2012, at least 15 million Mexicans. They also suggested the creation of centers of legitimate government (beginning with all the municipalities with more than 100 thousand inhabitants), a national network of communication, and groups working for the defense of the popular economy. At the closing, Marcelo Ebrard, the head of the government of Mexico City, attended and showed his total support for the actions led by AMLO.
:: FOCUS
 An X-ray of the state of rights in Mexico: the challenges and dangers of the judicial reform
On February 10, Mexico was evaluated by the United Nations (UN) through a mechanism started in 2006: the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Every four years, all the member States must undergo an “interactive dialogue” through which their compliance with international human rights agreements is evaluated.
On this occasion, Mexico listened to the commentaries and criticisms of a group of three countries and the member States of the UPR. Previously 3 reports had been brought before the Human Rights Council: one from the Mexican government; another from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the last one was drawn up from reports written by organizations of the civil society, in which the OHCHR also contributed. A hundred Mexican non-governmental organizations and 7 internationals denounced that “Mexico has not complied with its international commitments” and that torture, forced disappearances, extrajudicial executions, violations of freedom of expression, and impunity still continue. The report included 60 cases of criminalization of social protest in 17 Mexican states, including Chiapas, Guerrero, and Oaxaca.
In the final report, the UPR gave Mexico 91 recommendations, of which Mexico accepted 83 and left 8 pending. The accepted recommendations dealt with harmonization of the Mexican laws so that they comply with Mexico’s international commitments in human rights. The 8 un-accepted pending recommendations, according to the government, require “a more detailed internal analysis”; they deal with many of the criticisms presented by organizations of the civil society in its report. For example, the impunity and the institutions that should fight it (especially on issues of gender, indigenous peoples, minors, and journalists), as well as themes like military tribunals or courts, the legal concept of arraigo (pre-charge detention), and the definition of “organized crime.”
The judicial reform: a “cultural change” in favor of legality?
Many of the recommendations of the UPR focused on the Mexican justice system. For a long time now, the Mexican civil society has been demanding real reform in the area of criminal justice. The judicial reform, which was finally approved by the Senate of the Federation on March 6, 2008, attempts to integrate two contradictory tendencies: on one hand, it supports advances in human rights with the introduction of oral trials and a change in accusatory process (presumption of innocence); on the other hand, it supports the implementation of punitive measures designed to respond to fears for public security.
In the face of the insecurity that is being generated by organized crime and drug-trafficking, the Calderón administration has put the emphasis on `law and order’, relegating issues like respect for human rights or the problems of impunity to the second tier, both of which are important issues in the fight against organized crime.
In the initial proposal of the reform, the most striking points of contention were: the introduction of house searches without a judicial order, the expansion of the legal concept of arraigo (pre-charge detention), the regime of exception for those accused of being involved in “organized crime”, and the existence of un-pardonable crimes (in which one cannot be released from prison). In as much, Mexican human rights organizations like the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights (IACHR) and various Special Rappateurs from the UN, before the reform was passed, expressed their concerns “about the aspects of the reform which could threaten the situation of human rights.”
The judicial reform was finally approved by the Legislative Powers. However the searches without judicial orders were eliminated. The result was considered to be a “cultural change” in favor of legality by the Mexican government. Nevertheless, some called it a “Frankenstein reform”, because of its attempt to improve some parts of the justice system, but at the same time introduce repressive measures (such as the case of arraigo (pre-charge detention) and the problematic definition of “organized crime”). Others like Senator Rosario Ibarra (president of the Eureka Committee, which has worked for decades on the issue of forced disappearances), referred to the reform as a “Gestapo law.”
Two parallel justice systems and the growing risks of criminalization of social protest
Campaign: “To protest is a right, to suppress is a crime” - © Frayba
The recommendations suggested by the UPR centered for the most part on the new rules that accompany the legal concept of arraigo and organized crime. The most frequent criticism involves the fact that the reform has established a two-track justice system: one track for normal crimes and the other for organized crime. The reform will be in place within a period of 8 years - the time period in which all the states must implement it. There exist serious doubts about the assumption of innocence in cases linked to “organized crime.” From a human rights perspective, it is precisely in cases of the most serious crimes in which a careful respect for personal rights is necessary in order to guarantee a fair trial.
One of the biggest obstacles for the judicial system is the definition of “organized crime” and the criteria which determine whether or not to use the laws for organized crime. In Article 16, it is defined, “organized crime is understood as an organization, of three or more persons, which conspires to commit crimes in a repeated or continuous manner, as defined by the specific law.” Many organizations and social movements fear that this article could be used against social struggles, especially because the legislation does not specify which crimes qualify as organized crime. The creation of this “regime of exception” violates the most basic principles of equality before the law, and in addition it opens the door for arbitrary rulings on the part of the State, which could be used to repress opposition movements. According to the Human Rights Center Fray Bartolomé de las Casas, “to leave such a lax definition in the Constitution, one which does not specify which specific crimes are considered organized crime, could have very serious consequences, especially because it could be very easy to change the secondary laws and establish new crimes which should not fall within the context of national security.”
Human rights centers in Guerrero have denounced that “the loss of individual and social guarantees within the context of the war on drugs is a new threat for human rights defenders and social activists, in addition it has put the justice system and the mechanisms of protection of human rights at serious risk”. They argue that the State has “begun to criminalize human rights defenders through loss of legitimacy, the discrediting, the persecution of those who work for human rights, the fabrication of crimes, and the lack of recognition of the abuses that human rights defenders suffer.”Just in the last few months, legal action against social leaders has increased at an alarming rate all over the country. This includes a number of serious cases, before the enactment of the law, -in Oaxaca and Atenco, for example- where members of social movements were formally accused of kidnapping, blocking highways, and sedition.
Arraigo and the risks of torture
Another major fear that human rights defenders have expressed, within the context of the judicial reform and the “criminalization of social protest”, deals with arraigo, a legal concept, which appears in the federal law and is intended to be used in the fight against organized crime.
Arraigo is a special measure which exists in many penal codes in Latin America. It is described as a democratic instrument which can be used during a special criminal investigation, especially in cases where there is a risk that the person being investigated could escape. The process consists of a judicial order for “arraigo domiciliar” (a type of pre-charge house arrest) while the investigation is completed. The person must remain under constant vigilance without the possibility of leaving while the investigation is being finished. Before the reform, the maximum amount of time for arraigo was 40 days, however with the reform it has been extended to 80 days (in other countries pre- charge detentionhas a maximum of 2 to 7 days).
In Mexico, arraigo has a special feature: Generally they do not use house arrest but instead “arraigo houses” are used. These are administered by the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic (PGR). These locations could be public buildings like hotels, or clandestine buildings. Although legally the person who is detained under arraigo is in the hands of the judge, the person remains physically in the “care” of the Public Prosecutor (Ministerio Publico). Obviously this gives the majority of the power over the suspect to the Public Prosecutor and judicial police.
The most worrisome part of the issue of arraigo is that instead of using it as a tool to continue the investigation, it has been used to put pressure on the person being investigated and to force them to make a confession. Many of the cases of arraigo which have been denounced by human rights centers are related to “arraigo houses” where torture has been used, and there are major concerns that it could be used more frequently against protesters and social movements.
Photos of the place used to house people being held on
pre-charge detention, which is located in Balneario"El Pitiquito"
on the road between Tuxla, Gutierrez and
Chiapa de Corzo, Chiapas - © SIPAZ
Military courts: the major concern of the judicial reform
The military court system, with its complete absence of civilian control, was another focal point of the recommendations of the UPR. It is also worth remembering that it has been the object of constant criticism and recommendations on the part of human rights organizations.
Throughout 2008, various human rights organizations stated the necessity that the military justice system be exclusively limited in its jurisdiction to crimes committed within the military structure without “extending itself to investigations and prosecutions of human right violations.” Last year, the Human Rights Center Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez (Centro ProDH) recorded 120 cases of abuse committed by members of the Mexican Armed Forces, including illegal searches, physical attacks, torture, and arbitrary detention. They pointed to Guerrero as the state most affected in this sense. NGOs have affirmed an urgent need to establish civilian control over the military, and they are awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN), which will discuss the question of military jurisdiction in cases involving civilians who have been victims of human rights violations. Luis Arriaga, the director of Centro ProDH, stated that the use of military justice in these cases “perpetuates impunity and undermines civilian control, which in any democracy should have control over the military institutions”. 
What is next?
Differing from the issues with the content of the reform, another major challenge is its actual implementation. In its 2008 report, Human Rights Watch pointed out the “double face” of the Mexican State, which has signed numerous international agreements dealing with the defense and promotion of human rights and maintains a high profile on the international level in the area; nevertheless, these same agreements seem to become dead letters the moment they are applied in the country. Although one would like to look at the judicial reform as an advance, or as stated at the beginning “a cultural change”, it still remains to be seen what will actually change.
One final concern involves the capacity of social movements and civil organizations to act as a counterweight to the State’s repressive tendencies. Or if organized crime, and the thousands of deaths it brings every year, will be an excuse for the State, with the approval of an international community concerned with security issues, to legalize repressive penalties which violate human rights.
:: ARTICLE
From India to Chiapas: Reflections on ‘non-violence’
 There are meetings which renew our energy and give us strength to move forward. That is the sensation that we felt last February, during Rames Sharma’s visit to Mexico; he is a representative of the Ekta Parishad movement from India and in the middle of a tour of the Americas, with the goal being to organize a worldwide non-violent march in 2012.
In Hindi, Ekta means “unity” and Parishad means “forum” or a “space”: Ekta Parishad is a movement which joins together 11,000 organizations and thousands of individuals. Its vision is of an India where all people have free access to resources like the land, the forest, and water. An India where no tribe or caste has influence over the right to dignity, and where the community economic system supplies enough resources for the local community. An India where leadership and local autonomy can be built, and there is responsible oversight of the government on all levels. In order to make these changes, they are creating a forum where the voice of the masses is heard and they work in a Gandhian spirit of satyagraha (truth-strength) and ahimsa (non-violence) in order to end the violence that the most marginalized communities live with.
In 2007, Ekta Parishad organized a march to pressure the Indian government to implement agrarian reforms (“Janadesh, the voice of the people”). During one month, 25,000 people marched 350 kilometers to New Delhi, which constituted the largest non-violent movement in the history of the struggle for agrarian reform in India. Because of this march, the government created a National Commission for Agrarian Reform, in which 50% of the Commission are members of organizations involved in the defense of the right to the land (see www.ektaparishad.com ).
In Mexico, the presentation of their struggle roused the interest of local participants, establishing an interchange which illustrated the similar problems, such as access to land, community organizations, local autonomy, respect for traditional leadership and customs, etc. The representative of Ekta Parishad learned about the experiences of movements using actions of lesser size, such as civil disobedience by occupying land, popular consultation regarding agrarian affairs, or the peaceful occupation of official offices. By sharing experience we were able to see similarities between their experience and organized actions in Chiapas, such as hunger strikes by prisoners, the civil observation brigades, the Peace camps, and initiatives begun by the Zapatistas.
At the same time, there were many differences in context which make non-violent actions in Chiapas more difficult: the government repression in Chiapas (and in Latin America in general) has always been more repressive and quicker to act than in India. In addition, the culture of social movements is strongly linked to Gandhi in India, while it is linked to the revolution and to arms in Mexico.
From this interchange of experience, some very interesting reflections emerged about non-violent strategies:
Strength in numbers: The more people who participate in a non-violent action, the greater its strength will be. Because of this, Ekta Parishad promotes the peaceful mobilization of the masses, emphasizing the organization of actions by the people. During the march of Janadesh, for example, they implemented a structure of participation for everyone (all 25,000!), in order to make decisions. In the same way, the campaign was financed by grains and the little money that each participant brought to the movement.
After recognizing the strength in this type of action, non-violence requires a total compromise, which requires functional non-violence within the organization. Its members must be aware of the compromise it implies, be prepared to withstand personal suffering, including the possibility of losing their life. For example, when the march of Janadesh arrived in Delhi, the participants wait for hours in the sun, without water. In addition, three protesters were run over by a truck without acting violently in any way towards the driver. This was only possible because each one of the 25,000 members of Janadesh had participated in non-violent training.
A long term vision to build a lasting peace: non-violence requires patience, creativity, and even stubbornness. To not confuse patience with passivity, here it refers to active and even pro-active, non-violence. In order to plant the seeds of non-violence that can generate positive changes on a social, economic, and political level, Ekta Parishad tries to promote training in non-violence for all its members, activists, and the youth. Building this type of movement is difficult, but it is a path that opens the possibility of making lasting changes, as well as unifying the people instead of dividing them.
:: SIPAZ ACTIVITIES
From December 2008 to March 2009
INTERNATIONAL PRESENCE AND ACCOMPANIMENT
CHIAPAS
Highlands
-In December, we visited Acteal and Nuevo Paraiso, two communities in the municipality of Chenalhó. At the end of February, we interviewed the autonomous Committee of Polhó, in the same municipality, to discuss the situation of the displaced persons and the movement of paramilitary groups which was denounced months earlier.
-In February, we visited the Zapatista Community Ecological Reserve of Huitepec, located close to San Cristóbal de las Casas in the same region as the Protected Natural Area Huitepec- Los Alcanfores. This Natural Area was created by the state government. According to the community’s denunciation, it was done without consulting the population while additionally threatening them with displacement.
-In March, we interviewed members of the autonomous Committee of Magdalena de la Paz (in the official municipality of Aldama) in order to discuss the agrarian problems they have in the municipality and the recent movement of the military.
Central Region
In January, we visited the community of Cruztón and the municipal capital of Venustiano Carranza in order to interview groups which have suffered aggression.
CARACOLES/EZLN
-We attended a number of the activities which took place in Chiapas from December 30, 2008 to January 5, 2009 as part of the First Global Festival of the Justified Rage. The festival began in the caracol (Zapatista municipal center) of Oventik where the 15th anniversary of the Zapatista uprising was celebrated. In the next few days, in CIDECI- University of the Earth in San Cristóbal de las Casas, a series of activities and discussions took place around the theme of “Another World, Another Politics”.
- Between January and February, we visited all of the Zapatista Caracoles.
- On March 7 and 8, we attended the Meeting of Zapatista Women as part of the International Women’s Day, dedicated to the Doña Concepción García de Coral, “Mama Corral”.
Women
We attended the arrival of the caravan-march “for the Lives and Security of Women”, coordinated by the Mexican part of the International Women’s March, on December 1 in San Cristóbal de las Casas.
OAXACA
In the middle of February, we attended a number of activities which took place as part of the First Cultural Week of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) in the city of Oaxaca. We also attended the Second Ordinary State Congress of the APPO. In addition, we interviewed various counterparts who work in the state.
GUERRERO
In January, we visited Chilpancingo and Ayutla de los Libres where we met with various counterparts; we also interviewed various members of the Human Rights Center of the Montaña Tlachinollan (CDHM Tlachinollan) and the Indigenous Me’phaa People’s Organization (OPIM).
PUBLIC RELATIONS- LOBBYING
-At the beginning of December, we met with the Embassy of the Czech Republic (which holds the Presidency of the European Union for the first semester of 2009), as well as the Swedish Embassy (which will hold the Presidency in the second semester) in Mexico City. We discussed our concerns with respect to the socio-political situation and human rights in Chiapas.
-At the beginning of January we interviewed various members of USAID, the Political Section, and the Narco-Affairs Section of the US Embassy in order to discuss the Merida Initiative. Previously, we met with various actors of the civil society who are monitoring the issue (Mexican Network of Action against Free Trade- RMALC, Centro ProDH, Americas Policy Program).
-In March we interviewed members of the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCHR) who are searching for information in order to write a report about the situation of human rights defenders in Mexico.
-In March, we participated in a workshop about the Strategic Partnership between the European Union and Mexico, coordinated by the Delegation of the European Commission in Mexico.
OTHERS
-In February, we were present at the liberation of the prisoners Antonio and Héctor Cerezo Contreras who had been accused of belonging to the People’s Armed Revolutionary Forces (FARP) and then jailed for organized crime. According to various human rights organizations, their detentions had presented various irregularities.
-On February 17, we attended the Press Conference which marked the beginning of the National and International Campaign for “Freedom and Justice for Atenco” which is attempting to mobilize the civil society in order to demand the freedom of 13 prisoners who were jailed after the repression in May 2006 in Atenco.
PEACE PROMOTION
PEACE EDUCATION
On February 26, along with SERPAJ-Mexico, we organized a space for reflection for organizations along with Ramesh Sharma, a representative of the Ekta Parishad movement from India.
NETWORKING
-We participated in the monthly meeting of the Network for Peace (Red por la Paz), a space for action and reflection made up of 16 organization who support peace processes and reconciliation in Chiapas.
-We held meetings with members of the coalition of SIPAZ and close counterparts such as SweFOR (Swedish Movement for Reconciliation), Permanent Action for Peace, and Peace Brigades International (PBI).
-On March 21 and 22, we attended the Second Bi-national Meeting Chiapas- Guatemala in Defense of Territory, which took place in San Antonio Huista, Guatemala.
INFORMATION
-We received visits, delegations, students, and journalists looking to learn about the situation in Chiapas and the work of SIPAZ. From December 27 to January 3, we co-coordinated a delegation from Global Exchange (US) in Chiapas.
-In January, a member of SIPAZ met with the organizations CMC and IFOR (International Fellowship of Reconciliation) in Holland.
|
