11 August 2011

 

MEX103791.E

 

Mexico: Recourse available to victims of the demand for bribes and other government corruption federally, in the Federal District, and in the states of Guanajuato, Jalisco, Mexico, Michoacan, Puebla, Queretaro, Veracruz and Yucatan; legislation designed to address corruption; agencies to which such corruption can be reported and protection available

Research Directorate, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Ottawa

 

A 2010 cross-country public opinion survey by Transparency International (TI) shows that, of those surveyed in Mexico, 75 percent see and experience corruption levels as having increased over the past three years (TI 2010, 34 and 42 table 1). Slightly more than half of the survey respondents (52 percent) also believe that current government actions to fight corruption have been ineffective (ibid., 47 table 4). Transparencia Mexicana, the Mexican chapter of Transparency International, indicates in its 2010 National Index of Corruption and Good Governance (Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno, INCBG) that the Federal District was ranked as the most corrupt federal body (10 May 2011). The INCBG also found that [translation] "more than 200 million acts of corruption in administrative procedures and services were reported" at the federal, state and municipal levels (Transparencia Mexicana 10 May 2011). According to a press release issued by Mexico’s Ministry of Public Service (Secretaría de la Función Pública, SFP), [translation] "corruption is a grave problem that affects Mexico" (Mexico 26 Oct. 2010).

 

Legal Framework

 

In correspondence with the Research Directorate, a Middle Tennessee State University professor who is the Chair of the Political Science Department and a specialist in corruption in Mexico, explained that

 

the Federal Law of Responsibilities of Public Employees (Ley Federal de Responsabilidades Administrativas de los Servidores Públicos) defines corruption and abuse of authority among federal employees;

the Criminal Code classifies such crimes and stipulates the penalties;

the Law on the Professional Career Service in the Federal Public Administration (Ley del Servicio Profesional de Carrera en la Administración Pública Federal) delineates the procedures for hiring and firing civil service employees;

the Federal Transparency and Access to Public Information Law (Ley Federal de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública Gubernamental) guarantees public access to information; and

The Auditing Law (Ley de Fiscalización) regulates the powers of the agency responsible for overseeing federal funds (Professor 28 June 2011).

 

The website of the Ministry of Public Service lists the following international anti-corruption conventions to which Mexico is a signatory:

 

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Convention on Combatting Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions;

The Organization of American States Inter-American Convention Against Corruption; and

The United Nations Convention Against Corruption (Mexico n.d.a).

 

El Universal, a Mexico City-based newspaper, reports that in April 2011, the senate approved the Public Procurement Anti-corruption Law (Ley Anticorrupción en Coontrataciones Públicas) that was introduced by President Calderón and the Federal Executive in early March (5 Apr. 2011). The new law reportedly opened the way for the creation of a new code that defines corruption and can be used to prosecute corrupt public servants (El Universal 5 Apr. 2011). Additionally, the national newspaper La Jornada reports that on 3 June 2011, President Calderón signed into law an amendment to the Mexican Constitution related to amparo proceedings (juicio de amparo) (4 June 2011). The reforms aim to curtail the use of the Constitution as [translation] “a refuge by those who seek to evade or delay the application of justice and to broaden the protection of guarantees, especially in human rights" (La Jornada 4 June 2011; see also Reforma 3 June 2011). Reforma also indicates that the reforms, which affect several articles in the Constitution, apply [translation] “not only to the active violation of human rights by the authorities but also to violations resulting from their inaction or passive violation" (3 June 2011). The constitutional changes are expected to enter into force in October 2011, 120 days after their publication (Reforma 3 June 2011).

 

With regard to the protection of witnesses of crimes, including bribery, the Political Constitution of Mexico (Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos), which was last amended on 6 June 2011, stipulates in Article 20 that [translation]

 

[i]dentity and other personal information are protected in the following cases: when they are minors; when the crimes involve rape, kidnapping or organized crime; when the judge rules that it is necessary for protection. ...

 

The Attorney General must guarantee the protection of victims, offenders, witnesses and all subjects involved in the process. Judges must monitor proper performance of that obligation. (Mexico 1917, Article 20, C(v))

 

Article 20 also states that the victim has the right to [translation] "[r]equest precautionary measures and necessary decrees for the protection and restitution of its rights" (ibid., Article 20 C(vi)). Article 34 of the Federal Law against Organized Crime (Ley Federal contra la Delincuencia Organizada) stipulates that [translation] "the General Attorney's Office will provide sufficient protection to judges, experts, witnesses, victims and other persons who take part in legal proceedings" (Mexico 1996).

 

Government Efforts

 

NOTIMEX, a national news agency based in Mexico City, reports that since 2008, 6,500 police officers have been fired in the Federal District, 70 percent of them for acts related to corruption (11 May 2011). The United States' (US) Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2010 mention that the government introduced new legislation in January 2009 that created new procedures to investigate police personnel and to make it easier to fire corrupt officers (8 Apr. 2011, Sec. 4). Agence France-Press (AFP) reports that in August 2009, the federal government replaced 700 customs officers at its borders with the US with 1,400 new agents, as a means to counteract corruption (AFP 17 Aug. 2009). Sources note that in 2010, about 10 percent of the federal police force was fired due to failing tests to determine their integrity (Reuters 30 Aug. 2010; US 7 Jan. 2011, 4).

 

However, according to the US Congressional Research Service (CRS), "[p]urges of municipal, state, and federal police have not contained the problem" of police corruption (US 7 Jan. 2011, 4). The US State Department notes that corruption is not restricted to the police; it is also present "at all levels of government" (ibid. 8 Apr. 2011, Sec. 4).

 

Several sources note that the arrest of public servants accused of corruption has not been followed by convictions (ibid. 7 Jan. 2011, 4; ibid. 8 Apr. 2011, Sec. 4; LA Times 12 Dec. 2010). In some instances, cases were dismissed by the court because they were weak (ibid.; US 7 Jan. 2011, 4). Associated Press (AP)reports that 10 town councillors in Michoacan state were released for lack of proof on their alleged ties to organized crime (16 May 2011). According to Salvador Vega-Casillas, Minister of Public Service, the government’s fight against corruption was [translation] “inadequate” because it was considered an administrative matter rather than a crime (qtd. in NOTIMEX 22 July 2010).

 

Federal-level Recourse for Victims of Corruption

 

In a 27 June 2011 telephone interview with the Research Directorate, a lawyer from the Jalisco Human Rights Commission (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos de Jalisco, CEDHJ) indicated that in Mexico there are two constitutional ways to lodge complaints: the jurisdictional, which has compliance and enforcement powers; and the non-jurisdictional, which results in recommendations (Jalisco 27 June 2011).

 

Jurisdictional avenue

 

According to the same lawyer, the overarching jurisdictional institution that deals with issues of corruption at the federal level is the Ministry of Public Service (Secretaría de la Función Pública, SFP) (ibid.). From 1 January 2011 to 31 May 2011, the SFP received a total of 1,788 complaints, of which 822 were related to police officers (Mexico 14 Nov. 2010). According to the SFP's website, data collected through its website, electronic forms or e-mail is protected under the Federal Transparency and Access to Public Information Law (Ley Federal de Transparencia y Acceso a la Información Pública Gubernamental) (Mexico 13 Nov. 2010).

 

Complaints can be lodged with the SFP by telephone, e-mail (Mexico n.d.b), or an online form (ibid. n.d.c). The SFP is located in the Federal District (Mexico n.d.b). There are also kiosks (Denuncia Exprés) at which citizens can register their complaints (Professor 28 June 2011; see also State of Mexico n.d.c).

 

Citizens can also lodge complaints about acts of corruption or bribery with the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic (Procuraduría General de la República, PGR) (Mexico 9 Aug. 2010). This office offers assistance to victims or witnesses of any criminal activity (ibid.), including abuse of authority and crimes committed by government employees, electoral fraud, and crimes against the press (ibid. 17 Aug. 2010). The PGR's website also lists the various subdivisions to which citizens should direct specific kinds of federal crime complaints, including the Office of the Deputy Attorney General for Regional Control, Penal Procedures and amparo proceedings (Subprocuraduría de Control Regional, Procedimientos Penales y Amparo), and the Specialized Unit on Crimes Committed by Public Servants and Against the Administration of Justice (Unidad Especializada en Investigación de Delitos Cometidos por Servidores Públicos y Contra la Administración de Justicia) (ibid. 25 Aug. 2010a).

 

According to the PGR, complaints can be lodged by telephone (Mexico 10 Aug. 2010), e-mail (ibid. 9 Aug. 2010), or online forms (ibid. 25 Aug. 2010b; ibid. 26 Aug. 2010). The PGR is located in Mexico City (ibid. 10 Aug. 2010).

 

Once a complaint has been filed, citizens can check the status of their complaint online (ibid. 18 Apr. 2011; ibid. 19 Apr. 2011). There are also two phone numbers in the Federal District that citizens can call as well (ibid. 19 Apr. 2011).

 

Non-jurisdictional avenue

 

With regard to the non-jurisdictional mechanism, the federal institution that receives complaints related to corruption is the National Human Rights Commission (Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos, CNDH) (Jalisco 27 June 2011). The CNDH website states that one of its objectives is to investigate human rights violations resulting from the actions or omissions of public servants, except those committed by the judiciary (Mexico n.d.d). Complaints have to be filed within one year of the event and cannot be made anonymously (ibid. n.d.e). In all cases, the complainant has to provide a written version of the event, include documentary proof (ibid.), and sign and stamp the written record with his or her fingerprint (ibid. n.d.f). In [translation] "urgent cases," the Commission will accept complaints by telephone, always ensuring to obtain basic personal information from the complainant (ibid.). In such cases, and in those instances where the complainant could not provide personal information during first contact, the person has three days to ratify the complaint, otherwise it will not proceed (ibid.). If the complainant does not speak Spanish, a translator will be provided free of charge (ibid. n.d.e). The CNDH accepts complaints in person, by telephone and by fax (ibid. n.d.f).

 

Federal District

 

According to the Attorney General of Justice for the Federal District (Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal, PGJDF), citizens may file complaints against public servants at the Internal Affairs Office (Visitaduría General de la Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal, PGJDF) (Federal District n.d.a). In addition to the main address in Mexico City, citizens may go to any of the 79 branches across the district, each of which has a telephone hotline that connects directly with the Internal Affairs Office (ibid.). These offices also have a mailbox in which complainants may drop written statements of acts of corruption (ibid.). Other ways to file complaints are by telephone and e-mail (ibid.).

 

The Federal District Human Rights Commission (Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal, CDHDF) also accepts complaints against Federal District public servants in person, by telephone or online (ibid. n.d.b).

 

State of Guanajuato

 

Citizens may lodge complaints with the Guanajuato Ministry of Public Administration (Secretaría de la Gestión Pública, SGP) in person in the city of Guanajuato or by telephone (Guanajuato 15 Apr. 2008).

 

The Guanajuato State Human Rights Attorney Office (Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato, PDHEG) states that it is authorized to intervene in complaints related to human rights violations stemming from irregularities in the administrative process or the negligence of public servants at the state and municipal level (Guanajuato 25 May 2011a). In correspondence with the Research Directorate, a state attorney with the PDHEG wrote that the Ministry of Public Administration is responsible for the audit and evaluation of government assets and programs (ibid. 5 July 2011).

 

In 2010, the PDHEG addressed 1,134 complaints and issued 487 recommendations to various state and municipal authorities (ibid. 17 Feb. 2011, 10). The recommendations principally aimed to address violations of personal integrity and security (136), the right to legal protection (134), the right to freedom (111), equality rights and fair treatment (61), and privacy rights (36) (ibid.). The PDHEG indicates that 93.84 percent of these recommendations were accepted in full (ibid.).

 

Persons wishing to file complaints with the PDHEG may do so in person in the city of Guanajuato, or by telephone, fax or e-mail (ibid. 25 May 2011a). The PDHEG website indicates that it also has satellite offices in five municipalities at which citizens can lodge complaints (ibid. 25 May 2011 b). The offices are located in the cities of Leon, Irapuato, Celaya, San Miguel de Allende, and Acambaro (ibid.).

 

State of Jalisco

 

The Government of Jalisco’s website has an online form for citizens who wish to lodge complaints against public servants anonymously (Jalisco n.d.a). The form asks for information related to the public servant in question, including his or her name, physical characteristics and gender, as well as a brief and detailed description of the events (ibid.). Other means of filing complaints with the Government of Jalisco could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate (ibid.).

 

Citizens can also lodge complaints of human rights violations against public servants with the State of Jalisco Human Rights Commission (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Jalisco, CEDHJ) (Jalisco n.d.b). According to a lawyer at the CEDHJ, the Commission only accepts complaints about corruption that involve irregularities at the administrative and non-jurisdictional level (ibid. 27 June 2011). Complaints filed with the CEDHJ must be accompanied with personal identification, a detailed description of the events, and the name of the public servant involved as well as his or her personal information, such as age, gender, and nationality (ibid. n.d.b). If the person wishing to file the complaint can not do so in person, the complainant has five days to ratify it; otherwise, it will not proceed (ibid.). All personal information provided to the Commission is reportedly considered confidential (ibid.).

 

Citizens can submit their complaints to the CEDHJ in person, by telephone or through an online form available on the Commission's website (ibid.).

 

State of Mexico

 

The Bureau of the Comptroller of the State of Mexico (Secretaría de la Contraloría del Estado de México, SCEM) accepts complaints against public servants in the State of Mexico (State of Mexico n.d.b; ibid. n.d.d). The website of the SCEM lists the following ways to file complaints: in person in the city of Toluca or by telephone (ibid.). There is also an online form available on its website for submitting complaints electronically (ibid.; ibid. May 2010).

 

In correspondence sent to the Research Directorate, the Director of the Juridical and Consultation Unit at the Human Rights Commission of the State of Mexico (Unidad Jurídica y Consultiva, Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de México, CDHEM) stated that the Commission is authorized to hear cases of corruption and extortion by public servants (State of Mexico 8 July 2011). The CDHEM is located in the city of Toluca (ibid. n.d.e). Citizens may lodge complaints by telephone or via an online form (ibid. n.d.a). In all cases, complainants have to ratify their complaint by telephone (ibid.).

 

With regard to protection, the Juridical Unit Director at the CDHEM stated that it is the responsibility of the public ministry to [translation] "guarantee special protection of the physical and psychological integrity of victims, offended persons, witnesses and their immediate families, and in general, of each and every one of the subjects that intervene in the process" (ibid. 8 July 2011).

 

State of Michoacan

 

Citizens may file complaints against public servants with the Government of Michoacan (Gobierno de Michoacán) (Michoacan n.d.a). The Michoacan government provides citizens with a national phone line to register complaints anonymously 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year (ibid.). Complaints received are sent to the appropriate agency for further investigation (ibid.).

 

Citizens can also file complaints with the Michoacan State Commission for Human Rights (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Michoacán, CEDHM) in person in the city of Morelia, by phone, or via an online form (ibid. 8 Aug. 2011; ibid. n.d.b).

 

An article in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ.com) reported various analysts and academics as stating that drug-related corruption in Michoacan "is rampant" (WSJ.com 27 May 2011). The article also reports that the La Familia cartel has infiltrated police forces and municipalities across the state, displacing local governments (ibid.).

 

State of Puebla

 

In the state of Puebla, citizens may lodge complaints at Puebla's General Attorney State Office (Procuraduría General de Justicia de Puebla, PGJP) (Puebla 29 June 2011). The PGJP accepts complaints 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year (ibid). The PGJP also has an online form for lodging complaints that includes the address and telephone number of the Anti-Corruption Attorney Office (Fiscalía Anticorrupción) in the city of Puebla (ibid. n.d.a).

 

The Bureau of the Comptroller of the State of Puebla (Secretaría de la Contraloría del Estado de Puebla) also accepts complaints related to corruption by public servants in person in the city of Puebla, by telephone, and via an online form (ibid. n.d.b).

 

In 1 July 2011 correspondence with the Research Directorate, the Secretary of the Commission for Human Rights of the State of Puebla (Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Puebla, CDHEP) clarified that the Commission [translation] "does not have a budget assigned for victims of extortion and corruption"; however, the Commission does intervene in cases related to alleged actions committed by public servants (ibid. 1 July 2011). The complainant must present proper identification and proof of address to lodge a complaint (ibid. n.d.c). Complaints can be filed at any time of the day in person in the city of Puebla, by telephone, or by e-mail (ibid.).

 

State of Queretaro

 

In Queretaro, citizens may lodge complaints against public servants at the Internal Affairs Directorate of Queretaro's General Attorney Office (Visitaduría General de la Procuraduría General de Justicia del Estado de Querétaro, PGJEQ) (Queretaro n.d.a).

 

The Internal Affairs Directorate accepts complaints at its main office in Queretaro (ibid.). The person lodging a complaint must either complete a form located at the office or recount the events in person at the office (ibid.). The Internal Affairs Directorate does not accept anonymous complaints and it responds to complaints within 15 days (ibid.).

 

The State of Queretaro website also has an online form that citizens can complete to submit complaints against state public servants (ibid. n.d.b). The form requires the complainant provide his or her name, mother’s maiden name, contact information and a detailed description of the events to be processed (ibid.).

 

Additionally, citizens may lodge complaints at the Queretaro Human Rights State Commission (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos de Querétaro, CEDHQ) (ibid. n.d.c). Complaints can be filed by the affected person or a representative and cannot be anonymous (ibid.). All complaints must be ratified by the complainant within three days of submitting the complaint to proceed; all information provided will be kept confidential (ibid.).The CEDHQ accepts complaints via an online form in its website (ibid.). Complainants can ask for assistance in person in the city of Querétaro, or by telephone or e-mail (ibid.).

 

State of Veracruz

 

Citizens can file complaints with the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Veracruz (Procuraduría General de Justicia del Estado de Veracruz, PGJEV) (Veracruz n.d.a). The office is located in the city of Xalapa (ibid.). The PGJEV provides two online forms for citizens wishing to file complaints (ibid.; ibid. n.d.b). It also has as an e-mail address for checking on the status of the complaint (ibid. n.d.a). Complaints must be ratified by the complainant and must present personal identification and five copies of the documents being used as evidence (invoices, receipts, contracts or bank cards) for the case (ibid.).

 

The Veracruz Human Rights State Commission (Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos de Veracruz, CEDHV) also accepts complaints against public servants (ibid. 14 Feb. 2011). Persons wishing to file a complaint can do so by any means, including in person in the city of Xalapa, by telephone or by e-mail (ibid.). Also, the CEDHV accepts complaints at its regional branch offices in Panuco, Tuxpan, Veracruz, Cordoba and Coatzacoalcos, and at indigenous delegations in Chicontepec, Papantla, Zongolica and Acayucan (ibid.).

 

The CEDHV also provides information in its website on how to file complaints to the United Nations (ibid. n.d.c).

 

State of Yucatan

 

In Yucatan, the Office of the Prosecutor of the State of Yucatán (Fiscalía General del Estado de Yucatán, FGEY) accepts anonymous complaints against public servants (Yucatan n.d.a; ibid. n.d.b). The FGEY is located in the city of Merida (ibid. n.d.c). It accepts complaints by one of two different online forms (ibid. n.d.a) (ibid. n.d.e). Alternatively, citizens can use the national telephone number for reporting criminal activity (ibid. n.d.b).

 

In correspondence with the Research Directorate, the Deputy Attorney for Crime Prevention, Restorative Justice and Assistance to Victims (Vice Fiscal de Prevención del Delito, Justicia Restaurativa y Atención a Víctimas) of the State of Yucatan’s Office of the Prosecutor stated that his office [translation] "provides legal aid and psychological and social work assistance free of charge to victims and their families, from the initiation of the complaint to the sentence on the case" (Yucatan 15 July 2011). The Deputy Attorney indicated that there are shelters and refuges in place administered by the government and civil society associations for this purpose (ibid.).

 

The Human Rights Commission of the State of Yucatán (Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Yucatán, CDHEY) accepts complaints against public servants at its Internal Affairs Office (Visitadurías) (ibid. n.d.f). Citizens can lodge complaints in person or by telephone (ibid.). The office is located in the city of Merida (ibid. n.d.d).

 

Effectiveness of Legislation and State Protection

 

On 23 June 2011, sources reported that President Calderón questioned the integrity of judges and was quoted as saying [translation] "I know that they are on the payroll [of criminal organizations], I know how much they get" (El Norte 24 June 2011; El Universal 23 June 2011).

 

In correspondence with the Research Directorate, a coordinator from the Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez Human Rights Centre (Centro de Derechos Humanos Agustín Pro Juárez, CentroProdh), a non-governmental organization that promotes human rights in Mexico, stated that [translation]

 

the anti-corruption legislation is not effective in the country since corruption is common to many, if not all, levels of government and ... has an enormous impact on the lives of the population, from the collusion and tolerance of authorities with organized crime, the daily demand for bribes by officials at every level from across the country, influence peddling for business, and so on. (CentroProdh 29 June 2011)

 

The coordinator also stated that [translation] "despite many initiatives to reduce corruption, it remains endemic today since the structural causes and the culture of impunity that facilitates its functioning remain intact" (ibid.).

 

According to Human Rights Watch, corruption and a lack of accountability in “policing practices” has led to a failure in the ability of the criminal justice system to effectively protect victims of crime or human rights violations (Jan. 2011).

 

According to the Middle Tennessee University professor, even with the introduction of several reforms, the level of corruption has remained unchanged (28 June 2011). As he said, Mexico’s "biggest problem” is not its legal framework or the laws it has in place to deal with corruption (Professor 28 June 2011). It is the implementation of those laws, “which largely sounds like a description of corruption itself" (ibid.). He added that although there are loopholes in the laws, should they be “more effectively enforced,” corruption would not be so widespread (ibid.).

 

In correspondence with the Research Directorate, a researcher at Amnesty International-Mexico, said that the investigation of cases of corruption at the state or federal level depends on the importance of the person lodging the complaint and the accused public servant (Researcher 7 July 2011). Even if a case has grounds to be successful, investigations are often obstructed or ignored given the politics and corruption of prosecutors' offices (ibid.).

 

Reporters sans frontières (RSF) reports on the failure of Mexican authorities to provide protection to the non-governmental organization Communication and Information for Women (Comunicación e información de la mujer, CIMAC) after it was "ransacked" in 2008 and again in 2011 (3 June 2011). After the first attack, the organization filed a complaint with the Federal District Human Rights Commission (RSF 3 June 2011). Following the 2011 attack, the CDHDF asked Mexican authorities to protect CIMAC, but no action was taken (ibid.).

 

The CDHDF issued a communiqué in 2011 stating that [translation] "[i]n recent years, several authorities have shown little disposition to carry out, in their entirety, recommendations made by the ... CDHDF" (Federal District 26 Apr. 2011). The communiqué, which followed from the organization’s 2010 annual report, also notes that these authorities refuse to accept in their entirety the resolutions issued by the Commission, challenging their validity and, as a result, evading the responsibilities these authorities have toward the victims (ibid.).

 

Lilia Mónica López Benítez, a judge of the Ninth Collegiate Penal Tribunal of the First Circuit (Magistrada del Noveno Tribunal Colegiado en Materia Penal del Primer Circuito), affirms in an article published in 2009 in a Federal Judicial Power journal, that even though Article 34 of the Federal Law against Organized Crime (Ley Federal contra la Delincuencia Organizada) opens the way for the protection of witnesses, the wording is [translation] "very vague" and does not regulate anything (López Benítez 2009, 59). She further states the following [translation]:

 

Given that there is not a real program for the protection of witnesses, this creates a legal vacuum that impedes us from knowing, with certainty, who are subjects of protection, what is the assistance provided according to each particular case, the reach of institutional support, the rights and obligations of the protected, the limits of protection and the budget assigned for this purpose. (ibid., 58)

 

According to the researcher at Amnesty International-Mexico, complaints can trigger threats against complainants, but these threats are very difficult to trace back to the authorities (7 July 2011). If the complaints involve organized crime, the researcher contends that it is difficult to find safety "anywhere across the country" (Researcher 7 July 2011). If the complaint involves low levels of corruption, there are still no guarantees that the complainant will be safe from reprisals since links between corrupt officials and organized crime are difficult to demonstrate, especially when criminal organizations have national networks where the "subcontracting of crime, including targeted killings, etc. is also quite common" (ibid.).

 

La Jornada reports that, between 2002 and 2009, the Attorney General has quadrupled the number of witnesses in protection, from 99 to 411 (La Jornada 7 Dec. 2009). The same article reports that information about two witnesses has been leaked to criminal organizations, resulting in their assassination (ibid.). The Middle Tennessee State University professor, speaking to the Research Directorate in a follow-up telephone interview, said that in Mexico, it is difficult to ensure the safety of a witness (6 July 2011).

 

Information on official rates of prosecution of government officials charged with corruption could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

 

This Response was prepared after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the Research Directorate within time constraints. This Response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim for refugee protection. Please find below the list of sources consulted in researching this Information Request.

 

References

 

Agence France-Press (AFP). 17 August 2009. "Contrebande, corruption: le Mexique remplace la totalité de ses douaniers." (Factiva)

 

Associated Press (AP). 16 May 2010. Alexandra Olson. "Les élections locales au Mexique, sous la menace des cartels." (Factiva)

 

Centro de Derechos Humanos Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez (CentroProdh). 29 June 2011. Correspondence from the Coordinator to the Research Directorate.

 

Federal District (DF). 26 April 2011. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal (CDHDF). "Pronunciamiento de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal sobre el rechazo e incumplimiento de las recomendaciones emitidas." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.a. Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal (PGJDF). "Visitaduría." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal (CDHDF). "Registro de las quejas." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

Guanajuato. 5 July 2011. Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato (PDHEG). Correspondence from the State Attorney to the Research Directorate.

 

_____. 25 May 2011a. Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato (PDHEG). "Preguntas frecuentes." [Accessed 7 July 2011]

 

_____. 25 May 2011b. Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato (PDHEG). "Subprocuradurías." [Accessed 7 July 2011]

 

_____. 17 February 2011. Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato (PDHEG). XVII Informe de actividades - Enero-Diciembre 2010: Mensaje del Procurador de los Derechos Humanos del Estado de Guanajuato. [Accessed 7 July 2011]

 

_____. 15 April 2008. Secretaría de la Gestión Pública. "Presentación de quejas y/o denuncias." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

Human Rights Watch. January 2011. "Mexico:” World Report 2011. Events of 2010. [Accessed 29 June 2011]

 

Jalisco. 27 June 2011. Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Jalisco (CEDHJ). Telephone interview with a lawyer.

 

_____. N.d.a. Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco. "Denuncia anónima ciudadana." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Jalisco (CEDHJ). "¿Quién, cómo y cuándo se puede presentar una queja?" [Accessed 27 June 2011]

 

La Jornada [Mexico City.]. 4 June 2011. Fabiola Martínez. "Promulga Calderón reforma que evita abusos en el juicio de amparo." [Accessed 4 July 2011]

 

_____. 7 December 2009. Gustavo Castillo García. "En siete años la PGR ha cuadruplicado el número de sus testigos protegidos." [Accessed 13 July 2011]

 

López Benítez, Lilia Mónica. 2009. "Protección de testigos como instrumento operativo en el combate contra la delincuencia organizada." Revista del Instituto de la Judicatura Federal. No. 28. [Accessed 14 July 2011]

 

Los Angeles Times. 12 December 2010. Ken Ellingwood and Tracy Wilkinson. “Corruption Sweep in Mexico’s Michoacan Unravels in the Courts.” [Accessed 3 Aug. 2011]

 

Mexico. 19 April 2011. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Seguimineto de quejas y denuncias." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. 18 April 2011. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Denuncia ciudadana: Seguimineto de denuncias ciudadanas." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. 14 November 2010. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Reporte ciudadano." [Accessed 27 June 2011]

 

_____. 13 November 2010. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Política de privacidad y manejo de datos personales." [Accessed 27 June 2011]

 

_____. 26 October 2010. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Respecto a la calificación para México en el Índice de Percepción de la Corrupción 2010 la SFP informa." [Accessed 12 July 2011]

 

_____. 26 August 2010. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Denuncia ciudadana: Datos de la persona que realiza la denuncia." [Accessed 5 July 2011]

 

_____. 25 August 2010a. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Directorio de correos." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. 25 August 2010b. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Directorio de correos: Unidad Especializada en Investigación de Delitos cometidos por Servidores Públicos y Contra la Administración de Justicia" [Accessed 5 July 2011]

 

_____. 17 August 2010. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Delitos." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. 10 August 2010. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Centro Nacional de Atención Ciudadana." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. 9 August 2010. Procuraduría General de la República (PGR). "Visitel." [Accessed 24 June 2011]

 

_____. 1996. Last amended 25 May 2011. Ley Federal Contra la Delincuencia Organizada. [Accessed 5 July 2011]

 

_____. 1917. Last amended 6 June 2011. Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. [Accessed 5 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.a. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Participación del Gobierno de México en el cumplimiento de las convenciones internacionales anticorrupción." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Canales de denuncia de actos de corrupción." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Secretaría de la Función Pública (SFP). "Denuncia." [Accessed 24 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.d. Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH). "Funciones: Atribuciones." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.e. Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH)."El procedimiento de queja." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.f. Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH). “¿Cómo presentar una queja?” [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

Michoacan. 8 August 2011. Comisión Estatal de los Derechos Humanos en Michoacán (CEDHM). Telephone interview with a Human Rights Investigator Assistant.

 

_____. N.d.a. Gobierno del Estado de Michoacán. "089 Denuncia anónima." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Comisión Estatal de los Derechos Humanos en Michoacán (CEDHM). "Presenta tu queja." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

El Norte [Monterrey]. 24 June 2011. Daniela Rea and Mayolo López. "Denuncian corrupción de jueces." (Factiva)

 

NOTIMEX, Agencia de Noticias del Estado Mexicano. 11 May 2011. "Destituidos 6,500 policías por corrupción en el Distrito Federal." [Accessed 6 July 2011]

 

_____. 22 July 2010. "Plantea México nueva estrategia para combatir corrupción." (Factiva)

 

Professor and Chair, Department of Political Science, Middle Tennessee State University. 6 July 2011. Telephone interview.

 

_____. 28 June 2011. Correspondence with the Research Directorate.

 

Puebla. 1 July 2011. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Puebla (CDHEP). Correspondence from the Secretary to the Research Directorate.

 

_____. 29 June 2011. Gobierno del Estado de Puebla. "Recepción de denuncias y/o querellas por hechos que se presumen son delito." [Accessed 8 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.a. Gobierno del Estado de Puebla. "Comentarios y sugerencias." [Accessed 8 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Secretaría de la Contraloría. "Denuncia servidores públicos." [Accessed 8 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Puebla (CDHEP). "¿Cómo presentar una queja?" [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

Queretaro. N.d.a. Procuraduría General de Justicia (PGJ). "Quejas de servidores públicos." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Gobierno del Estado de Querétaro. "Denuncias y quejas." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Querétaro (CEDHQ). "Presenta tu queja." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

Reforma [Mexico City]. 3 June 2011. Mayolo López. "Promulga el Presidente Calderón reformas sobre amparo." (Selección de Prensa) [Accessed 4 July 2011]

 

Reporters sans frontières (RSF). 3 June 2011. "Police Find Body of Veracruz State Reporter Missing Since March." (European Country of Origin Information Network) [Accessed 23 June 2011]

 

Researcher, Amnesty International-Mexico. 7 July 2011. Correspondence with the Research Directorate.

 

Reuters. 30 August 2010. "Mexico Fires Thousands of Police to Combat Corruption." [Accessed 23 June 2011]

 

State of Mexico. 8 July 2011. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de México (CDHEM). Correspondence from the Director, Unidad Jurídica y Consultiva, to the Research Directorate.

 

_____. May 2010. Secretaría de la Contraloría. "Quejas y denuncias." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.a. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de México (CDHEM). "Quejas en línea." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Procuraduría General de Justicia del Estado de México (PGJEM). "Denuncia en contra de servidores públicos." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Procuraduría General de Justicia del Estado de México (PGJEM). "Atención ciudadana: Denuncia Exprés." [Accessed 12 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.d. Secretaría de la Contraloría. "Guía del usuario." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.e. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de México (CDHEM). “Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de México.” [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

Transparencia Mexicana. 10 May 2011. Índice Nacional de Corrupción y Buen Gobierno: Informe Ejecutivo 2010. [Accessed 30 June 2011]

 

Transparency International (TI). 2010. Global Corruption Barometer. [Accessed 30 June 2011]

 

United States (US). 8 April 2011. Department of State. "Mexico." Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2010. (European Country of Origin Information Network) [Accessed 23 June 2011]

 

_____. 7 January 2011. Congressional Research Service (CRS). June S. Beittel. Mexico's Drug Trafficking Organizations: Source and Scope of the Rising Violence. (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre) [Accessed 29 June 2011]

 

El Universal [Mexico City]. 23 June 2011. Jorge Ramos. "Yo sé cuánto reciben jueces: Calderón." [Accessed 12 July 2011]

 

_____. 5 April 2011. Ricardo Gómez. "Senado aprueba Ley Anticorrupción." [Accessed 29 June 2011]

 

Veracruz. 14 February 2011. Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Veracruz (CEDHV). "¿Cómo presentar una queja?" [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.a. Procuraduría General de Justicia (PGJ). "Denuncia electrónica." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Procuraduría General de Justicia (PGJ). "Quejanet." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos Veracruz (CEDHV)."¿Cómo presentar una queja ante la ONU?" [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ.com). 27 May 2011. David Luhnow and José Córdoba. "Drug-Gang Battles Leave Mexico Region in Unruly State." (Factiva)

 

Yucatan. 15 July 2011. Fiscalía General del Estado. Correspondence from the Deputy Attorney for the Vice fiscalía de Prevención del Delito, Justicia Restaurativa y Atención a Victimas to the Research Directorate.

 

_____. N.d.a. Fiscalía General del Estado. "Denuncia anónima." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.b. Gobierno del Estado de Yucatán. "Denuncia anónima 089." [Accessed 28 June 2011]

 

_____. N.d.c. Fiscalía General del Estado. "Directorio." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.d. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Yucatán (CDHEY). "Derechos humanos más cerca de ti." [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.e. Fiscalía General del Estado. “Quejas y comentarios.” [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

_____. N.d.f. Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Yucatán (CDHEY). “Servicios que la Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Yucatán presta a la ciudadanía.” [Accessed 11 July 2011]

 

Additional Sources Consulted

 

Oral sources: Attempts to contact representatives from the following organizations were unsuccessful: Secretaría de la Función Pública, Procuraduría General de Justicia, Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Instituto de Investigaciones Sociales de la UNAM, Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos, Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal, Comisión Estatal de Derechos Humanos de Querétaro, Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Yucatán, Gobierno del Distrito Federal, Gobierno del Estado de Guanajuato, Gobierno de Jalisco, Gobierno del Estado de México, Gobierno del Estado de Michoacán, Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Gobierno del Estado de Querétaro and Gobierno del Estado de Veracruz.

 

Internet sites, including: Amnistía Internacional de México; Committee to Protect Journalists; Europa; Federal District - Tribunal Federal de Justicia Fiscal y Administrativa; Freedom House; Global Integrity; Human Rights Watch; Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos; Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre; Mexico - Suprema Corte de Justicia de la Nación; Organization of American States - Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; PEN International; Transparencia Mexicana; United Nations - Oficina del Alto Comisionado para los Derechos Humanos en México, Refworld.