The shocking assassination of our colleague, human rights lawyer Digna Ochoa y Plácido, in October 2001 had a profound effect on all those connected to her and her work. In the wake of the tragedy, human rights groups committed to carefully monitor the investigation into her death to assure that the perpetrators are brought to justice.

In order to evaluate the progress of the investigation as well as to educate activists in the United States and England about the current human rights situation in Mexico and the peril under which Mexican activists work, Global Exchange and the Mexico Solidarity Network organized a delegation to travel to Mexico from April 14 to 21, 2002.

The delegation was comprised of five human rights activists, one environmental activist, two lawyers, one retired public health official, and two journalists, and was designed to support our colleagues in Mexico as well as to collaborate with Mexican lawyers and non-governmental organizations around bi-national human rights issues.

The goals of the Defenders Defending Defenders Delegation were to:

1. assess the results to date in the investigation into Digna Ochoa's assassination.
2. meet with other human rights defenders currently under threat and discuss ways to support their work and ensure their safety.
3. strategize with Mexican human rights organizations around bi-national human rights issues such as militarization, legal defense for victims of human rights abuses, and the Leahy Law.

Digna Ochoa
On October 19, 2001, 38 year old human rights attorney, Digna Ochoa y Plácido, was found dead in her office in Mexico City. Her death was a shock to both the national and international human rights community as well as the culmination of more than five years of persecution, threats, and assaults for her legal battles against some of the most corrupt and powerful institutions in Mexico. Despite public outrage and government statements regarding bringing justice to those responsible, six months have now passed with no conclusions nor any real leads in an investigation mired in politics, unprofessionalism, and lack of ethics.

Originally from Misantla, Veracruz, Digna Ochoa was a prominent lawyer known and respected both in Mexico and abroad for her tireless defense of the poor and voiceless. In accepting cases involving political prisoners, persons accused of involvement with insurgent groups, and torture and rape by military personnel (including the highly-publicized case of celebrated environmental activists, Rodolfo Montiel and Teodoro Cabrera,) Digna incited the wrath of state institutions from the Mexican Army to state police forces to the federal government itself. As a result of the numerous death threats and, on several occasions, being kidnapped and interrogated about contacts with guerrilla groups in the state of Guerrero, Digna was forced to seek refuge in the United States in November of 2000. She resumed her work in Mexico in the spring of 2001, in hopes that the threats would have subsided. Only three months after the Mexican government ended its protection program for threatened lawyers at the Miguel Agustín Pro-Juarez (the human rights organization for whom Digna worked until November 2000,) the threats were fulfilled, and Digna Ochoa was shot to death in broad daylight in her office.

The delegation's activities related to the death of Digna Ochoa began with a screening of the video "Digna," produced by Mexico production company 'Canal 6 de Julio'. In addition to describing her assassination and her work, the video contains segments of an in-depth interview with Digna and footage from a home-made video filmed on her last trip to communities of the Sierra of Petatlán, Guerrero, just weeks before her death.

In one scene of that video, Digna is seen assiduously writing down identification information of army jeeps as they pass by during her meetings with community members, and she is shown assuring the villagers that she supports them and will continue to advocate for their rights.

Next, the delegation met with Edgar Cortés, director of the Miguel Agustín Pro-Juárez Human Rights Center -- known locally as "the Prodh." Mr. Cortés related how the Prodh has solicited and been granted an advisory role in the investigation under a constitutional provision for crime victims. In this role as "coadyuvante," the Prodh is privy to the ongoing investigative findings and can question or advise the investigators and prosecutors, all the while required to maintain strict confidentiality. According to Mr. Cortés, however, this constitutional provision has rarely been exercised and neither he nor the Attorney General's Office know how best to utilize it. Mr. Cortés said that the Prodh has serious concerns about the manner in which the investigation is being conducted, and he believes there are many stones as yet unturned. He told the delegation that whatever conclusion investigating authorities reach, it must (a) have a firm basis in evidence; (b) be verified by international experts; and (c) fit into the context of precipitating events.

The delegation also met with Digna's brothers, Jesus and Ismael Ochoa y Plácido, as well as attorney and former colleague of Digna Ochoa, Barbara Zamora. Ms. Zamora is an advocate for human and land rights for Mexico's poor and indigenous people and has herself received threats before and since Digna's death. Ms. Zamora also represents the Ochoa family in their role as coadyuvante.

Jesus Ochoa feels that the investigators are doing their best to establish that Digna was mentally unstable and that this instability, as well as the bitter rift between herself and the Prodh which resulted in her departure from the organization, may be clues to her death. According to Mr. Ochoa, the investigators are merely attempting to construct a path that would justify the conclusion that Digna killed herself. He also points out that investigators have yet to begin a comprehensive look into the cases Digna was handling at the time of her death or to seek out and interrogate the individuals and groups who were most negatively impacted by Digna's work.

In it's final meeting, the delegation met with Renato Sales-Heredia, Sub-Attorney General for Preliminary Investigations in Mexico's Federal District and head of the Digna investigation. Mr. Sales took over the investigation in December 2001 as a result of the ineffectiveness of the first investigative team, including numerous leaks of sensitive information, causing yet set-back in the investigation.

Mr. Sales' introductory remarks included a lengthy explanation about his impartiality and distance from political interests in the case. He spent the first half-hour of the conversation explaining that, as a member of a PRD (Party of the Democratic Revolution) institution, promoting the suicide theory would be contrary to his political motives, then spent the next hour and a half trying to convince us of that theory without a single reference to other possible lines of investigation. He also described the pressure he feels from the international human rights community. Mr. Sales emphasized that he believes he will face strong criticism if he concludes that Digna Ochoa's death was in fact a suicide.

Mr. Sales explained that although much of the evidence certainly appeared to indicate an assassination, Digna's death was more likely a suicide intended to (falsely) implicate the Mexican Army and allow her to die a "martyr."

Mr. Sales then described a complex, unsubstantiated theory of Digna's allegedly troubled mental state, her desire for revenge against the government and her former colleagues at the Prodh, and her quest for martyrdom. Despite the extent to which Mr. Sales is counting on psychological theory to wrap up the case, he failed to indicate that he has ever placed a psychiatrist or psychologist on the investigative team, nor that he had ever sought out the services of a forensic psychologist to review evidence or report on Digna's personal history.

During the meeting, Mr. Sales insinuated knowledge of Digna's personal life that casts doubt on previous death threats she received, in a clear effort to slander Digna's name. In a clear breach of professional ethics, Mr. Sales went to great lengths to convince us of what appears to be his personal conviction -- that Digna committed suicide. While none of the members of the delegation are trained investigators, some members of the delegation left the presentation questioning the viability of the suicide theory.

CONCLUSIONS:

The investigation of the assassination of Digna Ochoa is plagued by political posturing and is not a serious criminal investigation.

The discussion with Mr. Sales confirmed that the investigators are focusing almost exclusively on a suicide theory and that the overwhelming bulk of their work, including interviewing Digna's family members and coworkers, has targeted her mental health and her personal and professional relationships rather than suspects related to previous death threats and kidnappings, such as persons linked to the Mexican Army.

Furthermore, Mr. Sales' reaction to questions regarding Digna's death revealed that he is inappropriately wedded to the suicide theory, to the detriment of the necessary investigative objectivity. Mr. Sales demonstrated an unbalanced amount of intellectual and emotional inertia invested in this single theory of Digna's death, which has undermined, and will continue to undermine, any efforts to pursue the more simple and obvious lines of inquiry.

The delegation feels that any competent investigation must first focus on the persons, institutions, and interests most threatened by Digna's life's work in human rights -- which had for over six years resulted in death threats, abductions, torture, and attempts on her life -- before turning to more complex theories. The delegation is equally convinced that beginning with a conclusion, and then searching for evidence to support it, is simply bad police science.

In short, the Ochoa investigation is characterized two ethical problems: attempted denigration of the victim's reputation and lack of objectivity.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. that the investigation not focus on the suicide theory, but rather exhaust all possible lines of inquiry, beginning with those related to the cases Digna worked on both previous to and at the time of her death and those related to the threats and kidnappings to which Digna was subjected between 1996 and 2001.
2. that, as soon as possible, the investigation incorporate a foreign, independent expert in criminology to review the proceedings to date of the Mexico City Attorney General's Office and assess the viability of the suicide theory, based on the recommendation by Dr. Pedro Díaz Romero contracted by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission to report on the investigation.
3. that the Mexico City Attorney General's Office design and implement specific measures to facilitate and guarantee effective cooperation by the federal government.

Human Rights Defenders
Throughout Mexico, both professional human rights defenders and private citizens are discouraged, through intimidation, threats and violence, from trying to seek justice. As recently as March of 2002, Señor Javier Ibañez, a businessman from Guerrero, was machine-gunned to death in broad daylight in the capitol of Chilpancingo. Señor Ibañez had been trying for some time to find those responsible for the kidnapping of his son several years earlier. While in Mexico, the delegation met with three human rights defenders who, after having received numerous death threats, have received police protection in accordance with recommendations made by the Inter-American Human Rights Commission (IAHRC).

Barbara Zamora has taken on the majority of the cases that the late Digna Ochoa was working on before her death. In the fall of 2001, the IAHRC made a series of general recommendations for the protection of several human rights defenders, including Ms. Zamora. In November of 2001, Ms. Zamora met with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Foreign Relations to determine what security measures would be taken. The resulting agreement from this meeting was that the government would provide armed guards outside of Ms. Zamora's office as well as a closed-circuit camera system within the office.

While two police officers are currently stationed outside Ms. Zamora's office, the camera system has yet to be installed, six months after the government agreed to provide the measure.

The delegation then met with two other threatened human rights defenders: Abel Barrera and Hilda Navarrete. Mr. Barrera is the director of the "Tlachinollan" Center for Human Rights based in Tlapa, Guerrero. Tlachinollan works with Tlapanec and Mixtec indigenous communities in the region in human rights education and legal advocacy, including defending and supporting victims of rape, kidnapping, torture. Ms. Navarette is the director of the human rights organization "The Voice of Those Without a Voice," which also works in defense of the rights of marginalized peoples. During the delegation's trip to Guerrero, the delegation spent a great deal of time with both Mr. Barrera and Ms. Navarette, accompanying Mr. Barrera to the indigenous communities of Barranca Bejuco and Barranca Tecuani in the municipality of Acatepec.

Due to the death threats Mr. Barrera has received on numerous occasions, the IAHRC recommended that he be accompanied by armed guards, who currently accompany him. The problem, however, lies in the fact that these guards were only provided transportation for the first month they accompanied Mr. Barrera; since then they have had to find their own means of travel. Mr. Barrera travels to remote communities several days a week. As his guards are not provided with their own transportation, he has to travel unaccompanied, as he did during the two days the delegation traveled with him from Chilpancingo to the Acatepec communities.

In a meeting with representatives from the Human Rights Area of the Federal Attorney General's Office (PGR) about the lack of adequate protection, the delegation was told that the PGR does not have sufficient resources to provide Mr. Barrera's guards with transportation, as there are only three available cars in the state of Guerrero. When Mr. Barrera filed a complaint with the IAHRC asking that the PGR provide transportation for his guards, the PGR responded by mounting an investigation and campaign to slander Mr. Barrera. The PGR investigated his personal finances and filed a report with the IAHRC claiming that he owns a hotel, two pharmacies, three autos and a ranch. His guards filed a report claiming that Mr. Barrera would not provide them with discount lodging at a hotel that they falsely claimed he owns. This report was also filed with the IAHRC. Both reports were shown to the delegation in a blatant effort to slander the name of Mr. Barrera and to justify the fact that the PGR refuses to provide transportation for Mr. Barrera's guards.

Hilda Navarrete is currently accompanied by three Federal Judicial Police officers. The officers have their own transportation, and the measures appear to be sufficient to ensure her safety.

CONCLUSIONS:

The PGR is more interested in investigating the personal lives of human rights defenders, and in using this information to slander the work of these defenders, rather than providing them with adequate protection from death threats, even after that protection has been mandated by the IAHRC. Of the three human rights defenders with whom the delegation met, the appropriate levels of protection have been taken in only one of the three cases -- Hilda Navarrete.

In the case of Abel Barrera, the PGR has the ability and the responsibility to appropriate a vehicle from anywhere in the Mexican Republic, not just Guerrero. Though the claims made by the PGR about Mr. Barrera's personal assets appear to be false, his personal financial situation should be completely irrelevant in regards to the quality of protection he receives.

The Mexico City Attorney General's Office questions the legitimacy and seriousness of death threats sent via email to Barbara Zamora. The death threats were sent nearly six weeks ago, yet investigators have been unable to trace the origins of the email. The PGR needs to take action regarding these threats. It is this very political intransigence on the part of the Mexican government that led to the death of Digna Ochoa.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. with respect to the case of Abel Barrera, that the Secretary of the Interior require the PGR to provide the guards with transportation to accompany Mr. Barrera on trips outside of Tlapa, Guerrero.
2. with respect to the case of Barbara Zamora, that the Secretary of the Interior implement the second measure agreed on November 23, 2001 -- the installation of a closedcircuit television monitoring system in Ms. Zamora's office building.
3. also with respect to the case of Barbara Zamora, that the PGR thoroughly investigate the recent email threat she received and find those responsible.

Guerrero Cases
The state of Guerrero has a history marred by violence, political impunity, and human rights abuses. The state police and military units in Guerrero have been repeatedly charged with human right abuses, yet human rights groups say not a single military member has been charged, tried and convicted for human rights abuses. From May of 2000 to April of 2001, there were 38 registered human rights violations charged against the municipal police, state police, and the army. The leading leftist party, the PRD, has blamed the military for many of the 123 disappearances of its members and sympathizers during the past seven years. Despite constant accusations of human rights abuses committed by the military, the army maintains a strong presence throughout the state. Since the appearance of various guerilla insurgencies in the mid-90's the military has increasingly invaded communities under the pretext of looking for guerrilla members as well as marijuana and poppy plantations. In 1995 the state police were involved in the massacre of 17 campesinos in the community of Aguas Blancas, and in 1998 members of the military massacred 11 local residents of El Charco.

Guerrero is the third poorest state in Mexico (almost 70 percent of the population lives in conditions of poverty or extreme poverty,) and most often the victims of human rights abuses lack the resources to seek justice through legal avenues. In many cases the victims live in extremely rural areas with poor roads, making the trip to a local official extremely difficult. Even in situations where the victims find the resources to pursue justice, the government and military continue to operate with impunity. In cases involving state officials, police, or military, local officials often refuse to cooperate in finding the perpetrators, such as in the case of the disappearance of Faustino Jimenez (see below). Even a former chief of the state police has testified regarding the involvement of the police in kidnappings, as well as the use of torture.

In Chilpancingo the delegation met with the Guerrero Network, a group of representatives of human rights organizations fighting for justice in Guerrero. The delegation listened to the stories of three women whose husbands have "disappeared" at the hands of the state police. One of these women, Enedina Cervantes, described the events which transpired on June 17, 2001, when the state police came to her house in the middle of the night and violently forced her husband, Faustino Jimenez, from the house and into one of their vehicles. When she went to the police station the next day, she was told that they had never taken her husband into custody. When Mrs. Cervantes identified two of the agents that took her husband away, she was told that they no longer worked for the state police and that their whereabouts were unknown. It appears that no effort has been made to locate these two men.

Since 1999, there have been nine documented cases of disappearances at the hands of the Guerrero State Judicial Police. As a result, the Guerrero State Human Rights Commission has recommended that restriction orders be emitted for two ex-State Judicial Police chiefs and nineteen State Judicial Police officers. Despite extensive documentation and testimonies supporting the nine cases, to date, the recommendation has been ignored by the Guerrero Attorney General for "lack of evidence."

The following day the delegation traveled to the remote Tlapanec community of Barranca Bejuco, in the municipality of Acatapec. Here the delegation heard testimonies about the rape of 17 year-old Valentina Rosenda Cantu by Mexican soldiers on February 16, 2002. Mrs. Rosenda's uncle described how she was washing clothes at the river with her baby when soldiers surrounded her. One of them hit her in the chest and stomach with his rifle, causing her to fall on a rock. They picked her up by her hair and asked her if she knew the names of the "hooded men" (i.e., guerrilla members) they had on a list. Though Mrs. Rosenda recognized the names on the list, out of fear she said that she had recently married someone from the area, was new, and therefore did not recognize any of the names. The soldiers then knocked Mrs. Rosenda down again, and she passed out. When she regained consciousness, two of the soldiers raped her while the others watched. During the episode, Mrs. Rosenda recognized the insignia of the 41st Infantry Battalion of the Mexican Army on the soldiers' uniforms.

In the days following the attack, Mrs. Rosenda's husband traveled to the Public Ministry in Chilpancingo to report the crime -- an arduous journey involving an eight-hour walk and a several- hour bus ride. The Public Minister agreed to send someone to the community the following day to investigate the crime, but to date not a single Public Ministry official has shown up.

Mrs. Rosenda gave her personal account of the rape to the female members of the delegation in which she repeated what her father and husband said, adding details such as her fear for herself and the people named on the list. She did not receive medical attention after the crime, and continues to be depressed, cannot sleep or eat, and is afraid to be alone.

The delegation then traveled to the nearby village of Barranca Tecuani where another Tlalpanec woman, Inés Hernández Ortega, was raped by members of the same battalion on March 22, 2002. The female members of the delegation heard that Mrs. Hernández was at home with her four children when the soldiers approached her on her property and accused her absent husband of stealing the meat that was hanging out to dry. They told her if she did not answer them they would rape her right there. Mrs. Hernández understood the words, but does not speak Spanish and therefore could not answer them. Three men raped her on the dirt floor in her kitchen as her children ran out to tell their father. Mrs. Hernández also identified the soldiers that raped her as being from the 41st Battalion of the Mexican Army. Mrs. Hernández went to a doctor the following day, who claimed that because she had given birth to four children there was no way to prove that she had been raped.

Despite much national publicity of these atrocious crimes, the women have not received medical attention, trauma counseling, support from the government to report these crimes, or any information regarding to whom they should go about reporting the crimes. In fact, when speaking to authorities in Mexico City about these cases, the delegation was given different answers regarding what the family should do in order to receive legal support from the government. There can be no security or justice in a system that fails to educate and protect its own people.

CONCLUSIONS:

Outrageous acts on behalf of the military such as these two rapes affect not only the victimized women and their families, but the entire village and region. When the military is present in the region the children are afraid to go to school, women and men stop their work to be with their families -- their lives are completely disrupted. Until the men who perpetrated these crimes are brought to justice and the rights of the indigenous population are fully respected, these communities, along with indigenous communities throughout Mexico, will continue to live with the constant threat of violence.

The Federal Attorney General's office (PGR) interprets Article 13 of the Mexican Constitution to mean that crimes such as rape or murder committed against a civilian by a member of the military while conducting official duties cannot be prosecuted in a civilian court, but rather must be prosecuted in a military court. This means, for example, that the PGR refuses to investigate or prosecute members of the 41st military battalion who were recently accused of raping the two women in Acatepec, Guerrero. The delegation was unable to find any other legal authority in Mexico who interprets Article 13 in this way.

Article 13 of the Political Constitution of the United States of Mexico reads: ...The military court exists for crimes and misdemeanors involving violations of military discipline, but the military tribunals, in no case nor for any reason, may be employed in cases involving persons not belonging to the army. In a case involving a crime or misdemeanor committed by military personnel against a civilian, the case will be heard by the appropriate civil authorities.

As a result of the PGR's faulty interpretation of this article, there is no effective legal means to hold the military legally accountable for crimes committed against civilians. Police officials and the military enjoy almost complete impunity. In the case of the forced disappearances by Judicial Police, those guilty of the crimes are part of the same legal entity to which a citizen must turn for an investigation, prosecution, and justice. It is no surprise, then, that the Attorney General's office is unwilling to take the necessary legal action against the police force to stop these crimes from happening. Until the National Human Rights Commission, the only legal recourse outside the justice system, is given legal authority beyond a mere recommendation, these crimes will likely continue.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. that the PGR adhere to the Mexican Constitution in cases involving crimes committed against civilians by military personnel, i.e. that they be tried in the civilian justice system, not in military tribunals.
2. that the Guerrero state government comply with the recommendation emitted by the Guerrero State Human Rights Commission on March 14, 2002 for restriction orders to be placed on two ex-State Judicial Police chiefs, Jaime Figueroa Velasquez and Heriberto Solis Ramírez, and 19 State Judicial Police officers implicated in the nine disappearances since 1999.
3. that the Public Ministry of the State of Guerrero find and bring charges against the two Judicial Police officers identified by Faustino Jiménez Alvarez's wife.

US Embassy in Mexico
Having heard several eyewitness testimonies regarding military involvment in human rights abuses, the delegation met with Alicia Alison, political officer in charge of human rights at the US embassy, to discuss the Leahy Law. The Leahy Law "prohibits U.S. military assistance to foreign military units that violate human rights..." The human rights department at the embassy is in charge of supplying the necessary information to Washington for implementation of the Leahy Law in Mexico.