Mexico Updated 17.07.2014

OPCAT status

OPCAT Ratification : April 11, 2005 UNCAT Ratification : January 23, 1986 NPM Designated :

National Human Rights Commission (Tercera Visitaduría)

NPM Type :

National Human Rights Institution - NPM Unit

NPM Legal Framework :

Inter-ministerial agreement with the Human Rights Commission and NationalHuman Rights Commission's regulation (Article 61).

National Human Rights Commission's Constitutional basis and foundinglegislation.

Information

Population : 120 286 655 Area (sq km) : 1 964 375 Number of prisons : 387 Prison population : 254 108 Federal Structure : The Mexican Federation is divided into 31 States and 1Federal District

Quick Links

Special Rapporteur: Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and othercruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Addendum. Mission toMexico. (December 2014)

UPR: Report of the Working Group (December 2013)

Communication to the SPT: Official Correspondence from Mexico (16 July2007)

SPT: Visit Report (31 May 2010) and Responses from Mexico: October 2011 and February 2013

CAT: Concluding Observations (December 2012)

SRT: Visit Report (1998) and latest visit (April-May 2014) - Preliminaryobservations

OPCAT Situation

Mexico ratified the OPCAT in 2005 and designated the National Human RightsCommission as its NPM two years later through an inter-ministerial agreement,which regulates partly its functions. In addition, amendments were brought tothe Commission’s Regulations to better reflect the NPM’s mandate.

A specific Unit was established within a department of the Human RightsCommission (Tercera Visitaduría) to perform the function of NPM.The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture visited Mexico in 2010 and thereport was made public, as well as the State’s response.

The SPT member Emilio Ginés Santidrian is the SPT Focal Point for Mexico.

NPM Designation

NPM Designated

The Government of Mexico designated the National Human Rights Commissionas the NPM on 11 July 2007.

Process

2005 - 2007

A consultation process to decide about the structure of the Mexican NPM lastedover two years (2005-2007) and was led by the UN Office of the HighCommissioner for Human Rights in Mexico, in collaboration with the Ministry ofForeign Affairs and the APT. The objective of this process was to inform anddiscuss amongst relevant actors the implications of OPCAT implementation inthe Mexican context and, based on these conclusions, design and create the

most appropriate NPM. Representatives of relevant ministries and publicinstitutions, NGOs from the hosting state and national entities as well as guestsinvolved in NPM processes in other countries participated. The Office of theHigh Commissioner for Human Rights in Mexico has published a book on thisprocess.

One of the conclusions of the 2005-2007 consultations’ process highlighted thatthe challenges of the NPM were too great to be taken on by a single institution.It was proposed that designating a “mixed” mechanism with the involvement ofthe NHRC, the state human rights commissions and civil society groups wouldbe the most appropriate option.

The creation of a new body to coordinate actions and act as interlocutor with theSPT was also envisaged. The National NGO Network "All Rights for All" draftedan NPM proposal in this spirit.

Following the change of Federal Government in early 2007 and the approachingdeadline to have the NPM designated by 22 June 2007 (a year after the entryinto force of the OPCAT, as foreseen in the treaty), the Ministry of ForeignAffairs began a series of consultations with relevant ministries and the NationalHuman Rights Commission (NHRC). In June 2007 the NHRC was designatedas NPM, through an inter-ministerial agreement, which regulates the functioningof the NPM. The Internal Regulations of the NHRC were amended to reflect thisnew mandate and Article 61 states that the Tercera Visitaduría shall coordinatethe actions of the NPM.

The inter-ministerial agreement designating the NHRC as NPM is interesting asa modality to guarantee the collaboration of relevant ministries in the visits andimplementation of recommendations. Nevertheless, some restrictive clauses area source of concern: the NPM visits can be limited for reasons of public securityand national defence, amongst others (when the OPCAT foresees these sorts ofrestrictions only for SPT visits) and public authorities are to accompany the visitto all the instalment of the facilities and decide on the place for interviews withdetainees.

National civil society organizations and the academic sector publicly questionedthe decision and wrote a letter to the Board of the NHRC raising their concernsabout designating an existing institution as NPM. The APT questioned whetherthe decision to designate the NHRC took into consideration the results of theconsultation process.

NPM Internal Organisation

Following its designation as NPM, the National Human Rights Commissionestablished an NPM unit within an existing department of the Commission(Tercera Visitaduría). The Unit is coordinated by a Director who acts under thesupervision of the Head (Tercer Visitador).

NPM Resources

Human Resources

The NPM Unit is currently comprised of a Director and a multidisciplinary teamcomposed of around 20 persons, some of whom were formerly involved inprison monitoring within the National Human Rights Commission.

Financial Resources

The APT was informed that the NPM unit does not have any ring-fenced budgetfor its NPM operations. The NPM costs are included in the overall budget oftheTercera Visitaduría.

NPM Working Methods

Monitoring Methodology

The visiting teams are usually comprised of 3 persons, and always include adoctor. The average length of a visit is half a day. The NPM has developedvisiting guidelines for each type of detention centre.

(Un)Announced Visits

The NPM conducts unannounced visits to several types of detention facilities atthe federal, state and municipal level.

Programme of Visits

The NPM started to conduct the first round of unannounced visits to all prisonsin Mexico City in September 2007 and by the end of 2011, the NPM had visiteddetention facilities in all States of the Federation.

The NPM carries out regular visits and follow-up visits to the following type ofplaces of deprivation of liberty:

adult prisonsjuvenile detention centrespublic prosecutors' offices and arrest places cells of public security andmunicipal prisonshospitals, including psychiatric institutions shelters for victims of crime

In 2013, the Mexican NPM conducted 539 visits to places of detention in 10States of the Federation as follows:

86 social reintegration centres17 prisons at municipal and district level183 cells of public security and court cells9 juvenile detention centres227 public prosecutors' offices, arrest places and others11 shelters for victims of crime6 psychiatric institutions

Most recently, the NPM started visiting migrant detention centres.

Handling of Complaints

The NPM refers individual cases to be investigated to the General Direction ofComplaints of the National Human Rights Commission.

NPM Reports and Recommendations

Visits Reports

The Mexican NPM publishes two types of reports following its visits:

Initial reports on places of detention visited in a specific state (a singlereport is drafted for all places of detention visited in a single state).Follow-up reports by states visited, including information on the level ofimplementation of the recommendations made following the initial visit.

Reports are made available on the NPM website.

Annual Reports

The Mexican NPM has published annual reports (only available in Spanish)since the beginning of its operations. The reports provide a synthesis of theactivities carried out, in particular visits conducted to different places ofdetention. All annual reports are made available on the NPM website.

Annual report 2013

Annual report 2012Annual report 2011Annual report 2010Annual report 2009Annual report 2008Annual report 2007

NPM Relationships with Other Actors

With the Authorities

In 2013, the Mexican NPM conducted trainings on torture prevention and theIstanbul Protocol. The NPM informed the APT that it maintains regular contactswith the municipal and State authorities to follow-up on irregularities detectedduring visits to the different detention facilities.

With States Human Rights Commissions

As of June 2012, the NPM had signed cooperation agreements with 32 statehuman rights commissions to increase the coverage of places of detention andto ensure that state human rights commissions monitor places of detention on aregular basis, even in the absence of the NPM. This cooperation include jointvisits between the NPM and the state human rights commission.

With Civil Society Organisations

In May 2008, a dozen NGOs were invited by the NPM to take part in anAdvisory Council. The majority of those convened were reluctant to participate.Following that meeting, the NPM convened NGOs to two additional meetings to

engage in further dialogue. However, to date, no concrete outcome has resultedof these meetings and no steps have been taken towards a closer cooperationbetween the NPM and civil society organisations.

With the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture

The NPM held several meetings with the Subcommittee on Prevention ofTorture during its sessions in Geneva since 2007. In August 2008, the SPTconducted a visit to Mexico, the first one to an OPCAT State Party of LatinAmerica where there was an established and functioning NPM. The visit reportwas made public by the Mexican Government in May 2010, following a requestby national human rights organisations of access to information under theFederal Law on Access to Information.

In October 2011, the Mexican Government sent a written response to the SPT.Some national organisations also submitted reports assessing the level ofimplementation of the SPT recommendations since 2008 (see report of the Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos A.C.).

In June 2012, the NPM, together with the Mexican Government, was invited tomeet with SPT members and Secretariat in Geneva to provide information onthe implementation of SPT recommendations. A delegation composed of seniorrepresentatives of the Federal Government and of three (Oaxaca, FederalDistrict and State of Mexico) of the five States visited by the SPT in 2008 metwith the international body.

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)