Executive Summary

In the early months of 1998, foreigners' participation in human rights observation in Mexico's most troubled region became a highly controversial issue in Mexico. Several high profile expulsions from areas of Chiapas known to be sympathetic to Zapatista rebels generated broad national and international media coverage and sparked a debate over what sovereignty means for modern Mexico.

During the last five years, foreign participation in human rights monitoring has often generated controversy and resulted in the occasional expulsion of human rights, humanitarian and religious workers. Government action against these "foreigners of conscience" accelerated sharply in the wake of the December 1997 massacre of 45 unarmed civilians by government-sponsored paramilitary groups in Acteal, Chiapas. During 1998 alone, the government expelled 144 foreigners. Hundreds more observers were pressured by immigration officials to "voluntarily" leave Mexico. Still others have been deterred from entering Mexico by the hostile climate created by a government-promoted media campaign against foreign observers and the creation of some of the most restrictive human rights visa regulations in the hemisphere.

Prominent voices in Mexico's human rights and civic community have challenged the governmental interpretation of the Mexican Constitution, which grants the President exclusive rights to expel anyone he deems "inconvenient." These critics say that in an era of new and unprecedented economic, political, and security relationships with the United States and Canada, and growing links with Europe and Asia, Mexico's stance toward international human rights observers is not only misguided, but lacking in legal foundation. The government's inaccurate interpretation of the Mexican Constitution, these domestic critics say, tramples on foreigners' rights to due process and a fair trial. Further, they say, the obstacles placed in the path of observers violate the rights of communities that have requested the presence of outsiders as a buffer to ongoing Army occupation.

Since the Chiapas uprising at the beginning of 1994, there has been a tremendous growth in civil society activity in Mexico. Such civic action has been an important support to peacemaking and human rights observation efforts in Chiapas and elsewhere and also a major factor in bringing change to Mexico's electoral institutions and practices. During this period, principle actors in Mexico's civil society have invited and organized the participation of thousands of foreigners in these efforts.

In Chiapas, the participation of both Mexican and foreign human rights observers in support of Mexican organizations and communities in remote and troubled parts of that state has been an important factor in limiting abuses against indigenous people and their property. This observation has helped to assure that the genocidal warfare practiced in neighboring Guatemala has not been repeated in Mexico.

This two-part report reviews and analyzes the humanitarian and legal issues raised by the Mexican government's expulsion campaign. It is based on in-depth research and interviews by Global Exchange staff and legal advisors.

Part one is a general overview of the government's campaign against human rights workers in Chiapas. This section provides a detailed description and analysis of several of the most dramatic and widely publicized expulsions. The evidence shows that the expulsion campaign by the Mexican government against human rights observers is nothing more than a systematic attempt to undermine human rights reporting. Part one also illustrates the links between phases of varying intensity in the campaign and external events such as trade negotiations between Mexico and the European Union. The government's expulsion campaign, part one concludes, violates both the spirit and letter of Mexican law and historical practice.

Part two of the report, which has been prepared by Mexican legal scholars, is an extensive legal analysis of the government's public justifications for the expulsions. Part two demonstrates that the government regularly violates Mexican law when it cites Article 33 of the Mexican Constitution as justification for expelling foreigners. While Article 33 gives the Executive the power to expel foreigners that threaten national security, Article16 guarantees foreigners the right to know the reasons for their expulsion as part of a due legal process. The often arbitrary and consistently rushed expulsions are therefore illegal in that they violate foreigners' constitutional guarantees. The report also finds that the government's expulsion campaign contravenes international treaties and laws ratified by the Mexican Senate. In conclusion, part two notes that the government's campaign to obstruct human rights observers commits the double abuse of violating foreigners' rights to due legal process, while obstructing the constitutional right of indigenous people to associate freely with whomever they choose, whether foreign or national.

Finally, this report offers recommendations to Mexican politicians, immigration authorities and other government agents on how to avoid further abuses and violations.