VZCZCXRO2902
RR RUEHCD RUEHGD RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHNG RUEHNL RUEHRD RUEHRS RUEHTM
DE RUEHME #1916/01 1771425
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 251425Z JUN 08
FM AMEMBASSY MEXICO
TO RUEHXC/ALL US CONSULATES IN MEXICO COLLECTIVE
INFO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2324

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 MEXICO 001916 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: MX PGOV PHUM PREL
SUBJECT: MEXICO'S HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION: THE GOOD, THE 
BAD, AND THE MONEY 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  Mexico's National Human Rights Commission 
(CNDH) with its $72 million budget was created in the wake of 
demands and pressure on Mexico's government to investigate 
crimes of the "dirty war" and with a mandate to investigate, 
report and recommend measures to address human rights 
concerns.  While it has won praise for its often exhaustive 
reports on abuses around the country, the human rights NGO 
community has criticized the CNDH for not exerting enough 
pressure on government institutions to end impunity for 
abuses and for not effecting positive change.  Jose Luis 
Soberanes Fernandez, the Commission's controversial director, 
has not improved the organization's image. End Summary. 
 
Aspiring to Autonomy 
-------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) In the face of criticism of its human rights 
performance dating back the 1960's, as well as increased 
expectations among international organizations such as the 
UN, the Mexican Government came under increased pressure to 
more effectively address concerns about abuses. Despite 
several attempts at the state level, it was not until 1989, 
that Mexico's Secretariat of Government (SEGOB) created a 
General Human Rights Directorate as a subordinate office 
tasked with looking into allegations of human rights abuses. 
In 1990, under presidential decree, the General Human Rights 
Directorate was renamed the National Human Rights Commission 
(CNDH). 
 
¶3. (U) CNDH remained a part of the SEGOB until 1999 when the 
Mexican Congress adopted a constitutional reform declaring it 
autonomous and freeing it from direct government oversight. 
CNDH continues, however, to rely entirely on the congress for 
funding, and the Mexican Senate appoints its President. 
 
Who Does What? 
-------------- 
 
¶4. (U) The CNDH's structure is comprised of five major 
bodies: the Presidency, the Consultant Council, the Technical 
Secretariat of the Consultant Council, the Executive 
Secretariat and the General Visitorship.  Of the five bodies, 
the Consultant Council and the General Visitorship are the 
most important.  The former consists of ten academic members 
appointed by the Senate and is responsible for establishing 
the CNDH's general guidelines, approving the Commission's 
internal rules and overseeing the budget. The CNDH's 
President serves as the head of the Council. 
 
¶5. (U) The General Visitorship, of which there are five 
undersecretaries or "visitors", is responsible for 
investigating allegations of abuses committed during the 
"dirty war," gender violence, trafficking in persons, 
migration issues, complaints against federal agencies, prison 
conditions and indigenous affairs.  Each undersecretary is 
assigned staff who investigates human rights complaints. 
During a meeting with Poloff on 9 June, CNDH Executive 
Secretary Dr. Javier Moctezuma said each undersecretary was 
responsible for following up on all recommendations issued by 
the Commission and for reporting to the CNDH's President when 
(1) recommendations are rejected, (2) recommendations are 
accepted with proof of total fulfillment, (3) recommendations 
are accepted with proof of partial fulfillment, and (4) when 
recommendations are accepted but lack satisfactory proof of 
fulfillment.  CNDH boasts its own forensics collection team 
and a private lab, adding that the PGR's samples are often 
contaminated.  During a recent meeting with Poloff, CNDH 
Second Visitor Dr. Susana Pedroza remarked the Commission's 
medical expert and forensics team are available to any state 
human rights commission by request. 
 
States Commissions Get Into the Act on Their Own 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶6. (SBU) State human rights commissions perform the same 
functions as the CNDH and are divided into autonomous and 
non-autonomous bodies.  State congresses fund autonomous 
state commissions and appoint their presidents. 
Non-autonomous commissions, on the other hand, rely directly 
on state governors for their funding and to appoint their 
presidents.  Of the 32 Mexican states, approximately 10 host 
autonomous state commissions.  Of non-autonomous commissions, 
Edgar Cortes, Director of Mexico City based NGO Human Rights 
Network (REDTDT), complained state governors interfered with 
the independence of the commissions' work by deciding which 
human rights complaints should be investigated and which 
rejected. 
 
¶7. (SBU) The CNDH and state commissions each have their own 
mandates and operate independently of each other.  CNDH will, 
however, invoke jurisdiction over a case if (1) it involves a 
federal official or agency, (2) a complainant is not 
satisfied with the state commission's recommendation or (3) 
if state or local authorities reject the state commission's 
recommendation.  National and state commissions meet 
regularly but enjoy no formal relationship; issuing 
recommendations independently of each other.  State human 
rights commissions are, according to Cortes, more open than 
the CNDH to dialogue with the NGO community but only on 
certain cases.  He commended state commissions in Guerrerro 
and Jalisco for their transparency but criticized Oaxaca for 
closing avenues of communication with civil society. 
 
Some Complaints are More Important Than Others 
--------------------------------------------- - 
 
¶8. (U) Anyone can file a human rights complaint with CNDH, 
but complaints must be written and include the petitioner's 
personal information (i.e. age, DOB, etc.), a complete 
description of the alleged human rights violation and an 
official signature or if the complainant is not literate, a 
fingerprint.  In urgent cases, complaints filed 
electronically, by telephone or orally before any member of 
the CNDH are also accepted.  When the whereabouts of a person 
are unknown, relatives or friends, including minors can file 
complaints on an individual's behalf.  NGOs also have legal 
authority to go before the Commission and report human rights 
violations.  A complainant has 365 days from the date of an 
incident to file a human rights complaint and if requested, 
the CNDH can extend the deadline. 
 
¶9. (U) Once an allegation of human rights abuse has been 
analyzed and it has been determined that the CNDH has 
jurisdiction to proceed, the complainant is notified and the 
case passes to one of the five responsible undersecretaries 
for further investigation.  If there is any confusion 
regarding the details of the case, the complainant has 30 
working days to gather and submit the required information to 
the Commission before the case is archived. (Note: If an 
allegation of human rights abuse does not fall under the 
Commission's jurisdiction, the written complaint is given to 
the pertaining authority.)  If a federal entity fails to 
deliver reports or supporting documents related to an 
allegation of human rights abuses, CNDH officials contend 
"the facts of the complaint will be confirmed."  Once the 
appointed undersecretary completes the investigation, a 
non-binding recommendation is issued. President Calderon has 
urged all officials to accept the Commission's 
recommendations and according to Dr. Moctezuma, 95% of CNDH 
recommendations are accepted at the federal level.  The CNDH 
also promotes human rights education and awareness through 
annual seminars, conferences and human rights courses. 
 
¶10. (U) Over a 17 year period, CNDH has received more than 
106,227 complaints and issued 1,912 recommendations. 
According to its statistics, 104,685 or 98.5 percent of the 
complaints were resolved satisfactorily.  A resolution is 
generally achieved either through formal reconciliation with 
the authorities during the investigation process or through 
compensation to the complainant. The CNDH reports that 
federal, state and local officials generally complied with 
the organization's recommendations by agreeing to participate 
in CNDH sponsored courses and workshops. 
 
¶11. (U) The CNDH groups complaints in several different 
categories, including arbitrary detention, improper exercise 
of public duty, and cruel and unusual punishment.  CNDH told 
us that the majority of complaints received nationally are 
related to dereliction of duty, rather than conventional 
human rights abuses. 
 
CNDH Comes in for Complaints by NGOs 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶12. (U) CNDH's $72 million budget is appropriated by the 
Mexican Congress. According to many NGO's, its GOM funding 
and the fact that its President is appointed by the Senate 
means it cannot fully posit itself as an autonomous 
organization free of GOM influence. Jose Miguel Vivanco, the 
Americas Director at Human Rights Watch remarked that while 
CNDH "does a decent job documenting abuses and identifying 
problems, it doesn't take crucial steps needed to bring about 
change."  Consensus within the  NGO community is consistent 
with Vivanco's observation.  NGO's also complain frequently 
about the Commission's lack of transparency and its thinly 
disguised disdain for civil society organizations.  One human 
rights organization claims that a technical agreement between 
the High Commission for Human Rights (UNHCR), which permits 
evaluation of the CNDH's performance by international 
experts, has never been honored by the latter. 
 
¶13. (SBU) CNDH President Jose Luis Soberanes Fernandez has 
also done little to counter such criticism.  In fact, he has 
courted controversy during his tenure.  The first president 
since the Commission became autonomous in 1999, Soberanes has 
been accused of using his organization to target personal 
enemies, including former President Vicente Fox. Soberanes 
has also demonstrated thin-skin, reacting bitterly to 
criticism of his organization's human rights efforts. 
 
¶14. (SBU) However, while the organization is accused by NGO's 
of being too close to the GOM, the attitudes demonstrated by 
its leadership are often highly antagonistic to the 
government here.   Soberanes' feud with former president Fox 
was fierce, and he sharply criticized both the current 
Attorney General and Public Security Secretary for their role 
in prior standoffs between security forces and citizens which 
led to human rights accusations.  More recently, he 
criticized the use of the military to combat the cartels and 
claimed that military officers had prevented CNDH officials 
from fully investigating abuse allegations. 
 
¶15. (SBU) Conversations with two senior CNDH Visitors - 
Second Visitor Pedroza and First Visitor Dr. Raul Plascencia 
- demonstrate the depth of the organization's antipathy 
toward the GOM.  Plascencia said the government's progress in 
the war against the cartels was "minimal" in comparison to 
the number of casualties.  With civilian deaths rising, he 
criticized the government for its failure to provide 
concrete, statistical evidence regarding the number of 
individuals arrested and detained for narcotics trafficking 
since the beginning of the year.  He claimed that the GOM did 
not have the support of affected communities and that 
narcotraffickers appeared virtually unaffected by the 
government's increased public security efforts.  Instead of 
deterring narco-activities in precarious areas, Plascencia 
said the government's efforts increased instability and 
retaliatory violence.  Considerably more restrained than 
Plascencia, Pedroza commented that allegations of human 
rights abuses had increased in the past few years and were 
likely to hit record numbers this year. 
 
¶16. (SBU) As for the charge that the organization's 
recommendations lack teeth, Plascencia said the Commission 
could inform the Mexican Congress when a federal entity 
refused to implement the Commission's recommendation. 
Pedroza made no mention of the Commission's ability to 
consult the Mexican Congress but said it was the 
responsibility of the accused organization to be accountable 
for its actions and to accept the Commission's 
recommendations.  If the organization chose to ignore CNDH's 
suggestion, she remarked, there was nothing more that could 
be done. 
 
¶17. (SBU) COMMENT:  CNDH points to its human rights reports 
and recommendations as evidence of its contribution to the 
promotion of human rights in Mexico.  Many of its reports are 
exhaustively researched and supported by extensive forensic 
evidence.  Furthermore, its association with an extensive 
network of state commissions provides coverage far beyond 
what any private NGO could achieve. 
 
¶18. (SBU) The human rights community holds CNDH to a very 
high standard, criticizing it for failing to more profoundly 
influence the GOM's record on human rights abuses -- far 
beyond the limits of an independent organization -- while 
insisting it function completely autonomous of the 
government.  For its part, the organization has done little 
to engage civil society organizations.  To garner respect for 
its efforts to defend human rights in Mexico, the CNDH will 
need to incorporate the broader human rights community into 
its human rights agenda. End Comment. 
Visit Mexico City's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/mexicocity and the North American 
Partnership Blog at http://www.intelink.gov/communities/state/nap / 
GARZA