The INM violates the rights of foreigners says Global Exchange
Dear Editor: Thank you for publishing the following open letter to Mary Robinson, the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights.
Mrs. Robinson, in an unprecedented act, the National Immigration Institute (INM) lashed out against foreigners who have attempted to visit indigenous communities in the state of Chiapas.
In the first three days of the present year, the Mexican Government, through the National Institute of Migration, issued more than 40 citations to foreigners of different countries, charging them with violating Mexican laws, without explaining the grounds for the charges.
Terrorized by the hostile climate of the migration authorities, some foreigners cited by the INM have left the country without presenting themselves at the hearings. Those foreigners that have attended the citations hearings have had to submit themselves to interrogations of more than five hours, including questions aimed at gathering military intelligence rather that at evaluating whether the foreigners acted illegally. Also, at the end of the interrogations, the INM refused to release a copy of the declaration of the charges, preventing the detainees from mounting an effective legal defense.
Similarly, the INM seriously violated the foreigners' civil liberties guaranteed by the Mexican Constitution by issuing citations that lacked specific accusations.
1. The second paragraph of the citation states, " the charge that refers to the allegedly unauthorized activities undertaken... which possibly violates articles 34, 43 and 64 of the Law...". This statement is a generic charge lacking legal arguments. Essentially, the generic charge is problematic because it is indiscriminate. That is, the more than 40 citations delivered by the INM contain exactly the same wording, showing that the migration authority prejudged all the foreigners that passed though the Los Altos check point, indiscriminately accusing them of performing unauthorized activities. For this charge to be valid, it would have been necessary to explicitly detail the specific acts that incriminated each one of the cited foreigners. Moreover, underlying the sweeping charges is a false argument: that foreigners must ask permission of the INM for each one of their activities in Mexico, even if these activities are not prohibited. Concerning this point, the Federal Judicial branch has already decided that "what is not prohibited is permitted."
2. Also in the second paragraph, the citation mentions that foreigners possibly violate, among other articles, article 64 of the Federal Statutes. This article establishes the obligation of the foreigner to verify that his entrance and stay in the country is legal. In other words, the citation simply charges that the foreigners have already broken the law by not proving the that their presence in Mexico is legitimate. But it is this proof, after all, that is the purpose of the citation.
3. In the third paragraph, the INM insists that they considered "the incriminating acts proven and they applied the suitable sanctions..." The questions remains "What acts?" "What sanctions?" If they do not specify the acts, whatever sanction imposed is in violation of the foreigner's Constitutional guarantees. Only if the authorities delineate the charges can it be considered that a foreigner had the opportunity to defend himself and decided not to do so.
In conclusion, in the first three days of the year 2000, the National Institute of Migration violated the civil liberties guaranteed to foreigners by the Mexican Constitution on more than 40 occasions, without having any competent authority sanction these acts.
Mrs. Robinson, the human rights violations that foreigners currently suffer have intensified alarmingly. Respectfully, we request that you intercede in this xenophobic campaign against any foreigner that decides to visit indigenous communities of the state of Chiapas.
Sincerely,
Ernesto Ledesma A.
Coordinator of Global Exchange, Chiapas
