 CCIODH
|
VI.CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions of the First Report of the CCIODH stated that in the Mexican state of Chiapas the human rights situation had deteriorated seriously, and it listed the seven factors which, in the opinion of the CCIODH, had most contributed to creating this situation. These were:
1. The intense militarization of the zone.
2. The presence of paramilitary groups.
3. The generalized situation of impunity.
4. Obstacles which blocked access to justice.
5. The structural poverty of the communities.
6. The repression of the different forms of organization of Civil Society.
7. The lack of political desire to find a solution which respected
the demands of the indigenous people.
Given this situation, the CCIODH made 11 recommendations which it considered could help improve it. One and a half years later, and after the work carried out during the 10 days of this recent visit, we are able to draw up a provisional balance of the situation with regard to each of these 11 recommendations.
1. Immediate and complete compliance with the San Andrs Agreements, and the continuation of the process of dialogue and negotiation between the EZLN and the Federal Government.
The CCIODH has stated that the fulfillment of the San Andrés Agreements, which were signed by the Mexican Government, remains at a standstill. Both the proposal for a Bill on Indigenous Rights and the various laws passed in some states ignore the central thrust of the Agreements, which is the recognition of the rights and culture of the indigenous peoples, since this recognition is limited to the municipal level. Thus, in practice, they ignore these rights as such and do not recognize them as subjects of law.
The creation of Autonomous Municipalities, organized in accordance with the San Andrés Agreement, has provoked a reaction from the Mexican Government which threatens and systematically attacks these, with the aim of dismantling them.
Both the proposed federal law on indigenous rights, which tries to replace
the proposed law drafted by the COCOPA, and the bill on municipal reorganization
of the Government of the State of Chiapas, have two fundamental aims:
a) isolate the communities and the autonomous
municipalities;
b) create a situation favourable for
the ruling party in the elections in 2000, by way of the support gained
from the distribution of economical benefits to those who accept them.
2. Constitutional Reform proposed by the COCOPA
The bill proposed by the COCOPA has still not been debated in the Houses of Parliament, since the Government has ignored it and proposed its own Bill in a unilateral way.
3. The consolidation of the functions of the negotiating body (CONAI) and the verificatory body (COSOVER)
The CONAI was dissolved in June, 1998, because of the continual attacks on it, its marginalization and its non-recognition by the Government. Since the San Andrés Agreements were not put into practice, the COSOVER became a body without a function.
4. Put an end to the militarization and para-militarization of the area (the return of the Army to its bases and the disarmament of the paramilitary groups)
The increase in the number of federal troops, of military bases and headquarters, as well as in the number of control checkpoints, explicitly contradicts the recommendation that the Army return to its bases.
The number of soldiers increases daily, as does the number of military bases and checkpoints, which means effective damage to the communities, as seen in the introduction of prostitution, drugs and alcohol by the soldiers, and in the pollution of the water sources used by the communities. Their daily life is also seriously affected by the searches and intimidation suffered by the local communities. The local economy is damaged because it is more difficult to produce and sell their products.
The presence of the army divides the communities, between those who benefit by providing services for the troops and those who remain distant to express their rejection of the invasion to which they feel subjected. The divisions produced within the paramilitary groups such as Paz y Justicia, because of disagreements over the distribution of the “goods” given by the government, provokes violence and consequently raises the level of insecurity in the area. This situation is in flagrant contradiction with the supposed mission of keeping law and order assigned to the army and the security forces by the Government.
The communities denounce that the number of paramilitary groups increases daily, as does the cooperation of these groups with members of the federal armed forces and the police in operations against the communities. We have no evidence that a single paramilitary group has been dissolved.
5. Assure free access to justice and promote the fight against impunity, through global actions that are not merely symbolic
Despite the announcement by the Government of measures such as the so-called “national crusade against violence and impunity”, and the establishment of “indigenous courts”, in practice the high levels of impunity and discrimination against indigenous people, in particular, continue to be worrying. In this respect, we would highlight the small number of complaints whose investigation has reached the end of the legal process. So it continues to be necessary to define the situation as one of genuine lack of equal access to justice and of guarantees that it will be carried out.
Whilst the Government continues to deny the existence of paramilitary groups, (only recognizing them as armed civilian bodies), these continue to proliferate, benefited by the state amnesty law, which permits them to act with impunity.
6. Immediate amnesty for the political prisoners
It is contradictory that the Government should deny the existence of political prisoners, and yet announce the liberation of 46 “members or sympathizers of the EZLN”, in a text presented by the Coordinator for the dialogue and negotiation in Chiapas. Furthermore, these 46 presumed “members or sympathizers of the EZLN” freed until now have not had their charges withdrawn, but rather have been released on bail or after completing their gaol sentence. Consequently, there has been no amnesty, and there are still more than 100 political prisoners in Chiapas prisons.
7. The return of the displaced persons to their communities of origin, with the complete return of their possessions and with the corresponding compensation for the damages suffered.
The refugees or persons displaced because of war, whose number increases instead of decreasing, can still not return to their homes, because the conditions which caused them to flee have not changed at all. The paramilitaries continue to threaten and harass the families which attempt to return.
The requests for compensation for the refugees have not been attended to, and as the situation goes on new conflicts may occur, as the lands the refugees occupied in their own communities are occupied, or in some cases sold.
8. Strengthening of the Mexican Human Rights organizations and guarantees for the presence of international bodies, as well as the recognition of the status of international observer.
The Government continues to ignore the actions and criticisms of the various Mexican human rights organizations. The property and employees of the latter have been threatened and attacked.
After the first visit of the CCIODH, the Government restricted the work of international observers, by imposing the need to apply for a special visa, called FM3. This obligation, and the way in which it is being put into effect, is a clear restriction on the work carried out by human rights observers. The CCIODH felt the effects of this restriction in its second visit, when, despite having fulfilled all the prerequisites, only 11 of the 41 applications for the FM3 visa were successful. No explanation of the reasons for the 30 refusals were forthcoming from the Government.
9. The intervention of the International Red Cross, as a guarantee of the humanitarian aid to the population, because of the rejection of the aid from Mexican institutions.
Although there have been criticisms of its work, the intervention of the International Red Cross ensures in some cases the provision of food supplies to displaced persons, and is thus considered to be a guarantor of security. We request that it remains in the area. The communities consider the Mexican Red Cross to be a Government body, and thus have no confidence in it.
10. The appointment of a UN Special Rapporteur for Mexico
No UN Special Rapporteur for Mexico has been appointed. The visits of the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions and the High Commissioner, occurring at this moment, cannot replace the presence of a Special Rapporteur, because of their brief duration and other limitations.
11. The creation by the European Union of a mechanism of verification of the Democracy and Human Rights Clause of the Agreement on Economic Association, Political Coordination and Co-operation between the EU and Mexico. This Agreement, signed by Mexico, should involve various Mexican and international human rights organizations.
The European Union and the Mexican Government have not established any mechanism for the permanent control and verification of respect for human rights in Mexico, and the meetings held between the Mexican authorities and members of the European Parliament cannot be considered as such a mechanism. It is still very necessary that these mechanisms be created, in order to ensure the real effectiveness of the Democracy Clause at the beginning of this Agreement. Specially recommended are periodical contacts with Mexican and international human rights organizations and the presence of observation commissions on the ground.
12. Since the previous Report, there have been more than 400 expulsions of foreigners from Mexico. This fact adds a new conclusion to the previous ones, regarding the difficulties for the observation of human rights. In May, 1998, the Mexican Government imposed new regulations which restrict the presence of international observers, and carried out expulsions on various legal grounds.
The regulations, and their later modifications, have been denounced
as restrictive by Mexican and international NGOs, and their aim is to restrict
the presence of observers and to impede their work. Some of the expulsions
have been appealed and repealed in court, but this has been ignored by
the Government. They have also been denounced in many international forums,
resulting in closer observation by international institutions.
