In international forums Mexico is a strong advocate for human rights. At the UNHRC it has voted with liberal countries such as the United Kingdom and France on key issues of human rights in Syria and Ukraine, and has consistently raised key human rights concerns in the UPR process and responded positively to concerns raised by other countries. It has also been a defender of human rights in the OAS and inter-American system—but in other countries. When it comes to its own affairs, Mexico’s commitment to human rights, such as the freedom of expression and association, has been less consistent. The government’s treatment of the team of experts sent by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights to investigate the Iguala/Ayotzinapa massacre and its campaign to discredit and threaten human rights groups within Mexico point to a troubling double standard on liberal norms, where internationally it supports them in other countries but challenges them it its own. And for the recent election of commissioners to the IACHR, voted on at the OAS General Assembly in June 2017, Mexico put forward a not particularly strong candidate, a career diplomat rather than a well-known human rights jurist.
Below is a breakdown of Mexico’s actions and votes at the various venues we are monitoring. For more information click on each title and summary.
Scoreboard:
| Freedom House | |
| Freedom Status | Partly Free |
| Aggregate Score (100 is perfect freedom and protection of rights) | 62 |
| Political Rights (scores out of 40, with 40 being the best) | 27 |
| Civil Liberties (scores out of 60, with 60 being the best) | 35 |
| Reporters Without Borders | |
| World Press Freedom Index | 45.45 |
| Transparency International | |
| Corruption Perception Index (CPI) | 31/100 |
| Global Rank | 124/180 |
| World Justice Project [1] | |
| Rule-of-Law Index | 0.44 |
| Regional rank | 26/30 |
| Global rank | 104/128 |
| UN Human Development Index | |
| Human Development Index (HDI) | 0.779 |
| Global rank | 74 |
| Americas Quarterly [2] (last report 2016) | |
| Social Inclusion Index | 68.89/100 |
| Regional rank | 11/15 |
United Nations System:
United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC or Council)
Mexico is serving on the Council from 2021-2023 and previously served from 2018-2020, 2014-2016, and 2010-2012. It is one of the countries that consistently votes to uphold human rights at the Council on the issue of Syria, North Korea, and Ukraine. [expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
UNHRC Resolutions on the conflict in Syria
UNHRC resolutions on the conflict in Ukraine:
| Resolution 32/29 | Cooperation and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Voted Yes |
| Resolution 29/23 | Cooperation and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Voted Yes |
| Resolution 26/30 | Cooperation and assistance to Ukraine in the field of human rights | Voted Yes |
UNHRC resolutions on the conflict in North Korea:
| Resolution 31/18 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | Consensus |
| Resolution 28/22 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Yes |
| Resolution 25/25 | Situation of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea | voted Yes |
[/expandableContent]
UNHRC’s Universal Periodic Review
As part of its mandate to promote human rights around the globe, the UNHRC has instituted a Universal Periodic Review, where, once every four years, each country’s human rights record is examined. Other countries are invited to review the record and make comments and suggestions for improvement. The country under review then acknowledges each comment by either “accepting” the comment, meaning typically that they agree to focus on, or “noting” it, indicating that they disagree and will not be focusing on improvements in this area.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
As recipient: Mexico received 207 recommendations. Accepted 194, noted 13.
| Area | Received | Accepted | Noted |
| Civil society | 1 | 1 | – |
| Elections | 1 | 1 | – |
| Enforced disappearances | 14 | 11 | – |
| Extrajudicial executions | 2 | 2 | – |
| Freedom of association and peaceful assembly | – | – | – |
| Freedom of opinion and expression | 4 | 4 | – |
| Freedom of religion and belief | 1 | 1 | – |
| Freedom of press | 24 | 24 | – |
| Human rights defenders | 26 | 26 | – |
| Human rights violations by state agents | 9 | 9 | – |
| Impunity | 11 | 11 | – |
| Indigenous peoples | 20 | 20 | – |
| Internally displaced persons | – | – | – |
| International instruments | 21 | 14 | – |
| Justice | 38 | 33 | – |
| Migrants | 12 | 11 | – |
| Minorities | 5 | 5 | – |
| Racial discrimination | 3 | 3 | – |
| Sexual orientation and gender identity | 1 | 1 | – |
| Torture and CID treatment | 8 | 8 | – |
| Women’s rights | 43 | 43 | – |
| Total | 207 | 194 | 13 |
Note: some comments are classified under multiple categories. Only select topics are listed.
As commenter: Mexico is an active participant in the UPR process, with 543 comments made so far in the 2nd cycle (for data available). Only 15.5% made towards other Latin American countries, but consistently made 2 to 4 comments for most, but not all, countries around the globe. Denmark, Solomon Islands, and Slovakia were the countries that received the most, with 7 comments from Mexico.
Note: This data is for the 2nd cycle of the UPR. However, the final round of countries were reviewed in November/December 2016, and that data is not yet available to include in our analysis here.[/expandableContent]
UN NGO Committee
Mexico has never been a member of the UN NGO Committee.
Inter-American System:
OAS Permanent Council
Under the new leadership of Secretary General Luis Almagro, the OAS has re-found its focus on promoting democracy around the region. This was shown most clearly in a meeting in June 2016 where Almagro presented his report on the state of democracy in Venezuela and proposed invoking the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
Mexico voted in favor of hearing Secretary General’s report on the situation in Venezuela as part of the OAS’s commitments under the Inter-American Democratic Charter, along with Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, United States, and Uruguay.
Mexico hosted the 2017 OAS General Assembly in Cancun. In the Foreign Minister meeting on the situation in Venezuela, Mexico supported and voted in favor of a resolution demanding the release of political prisoners and urging the Venezuelan government from convening a constituent assembly that would rewrite the Venezuelan constitution. Although the resolution had a majority of votes in its favor, it was three votes short from meeting the requirement to pass.
[/expandableContent]
Inter-American Commission for Human Rights (IACHR or Commission)
Mexico contributes financially to the IACHR and the government promised to contribute when the Commission sent out a warning last year that it was in financial dire straits. However, as of September 2016, it had not disbursed the funds. Within the Commission, Mexico largely cooperates. The surprise came when the government refused to cooperate with the Commission task force, the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI) that came to Mexico—at the government’s invitation—to investigate its handling of of the Iguala/Ayotzinapa massacre. The visiting group of experts detailed serious breaches of procedure and human rights violations in the investigation of the case. Their findings and the group itself were denounced in Mexican media in what appeared to be a government-orchestrated campaign. After the GIEI publicly presented its report, the government broke with the group, and eventually ignored the experts’ findings.
The Mexican candidate to the IACHR was one of three new members to the commission during the 2017 OAS General Assembly, alongside the candidates from Chile and Brazil. The candidate, Joel Hernández García, has worked in the Mexican Foreign Service, is currently on the board of directors at the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, works as an international advisor to the American Law Institute, and is seeing out a four-year term on the OAS Inter-American Juridical Committee. His nomination has been criticized by multiple human rights groups that believe, due to his lifelong career in the Mexican Foreign Service, he is incapable of serving on the Commission as an impartial arbiter of unfavorable judgements to governments, especially in cases that involve the interests of the Mexican government.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
Hearings:[3]
| Hearing | Issue | Score |
| 175th | Human Rights Violations Against Indigenous Peoples in Mexico and Functioning of the National System of Attention to Victims in Mexico | |
| 173rd | Migration and Asylum in Mexico and Case 13.377 of Silvia Elena and Others vs. Mexico on the Missing and Murdered Girls and Young Women in Ciudad Juárez | |
| 172nd | Inclusion of Racial Criteria in the Mexico 2020 Census, Complaints of Disappearances of Girls and Women in the State of Mexico, and Forced Disappearances and the Proposal of the Extraordinary Forensic Identification Mechanism in Mexico | |
| 171st | Constitutional Reform in Mexico | |
| 170th | Forced Disappearances in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico | |
| 169th | Rights of Afro-Mexicans and Afrodescendents in Mexico and Drug Policy and Reports of Human Rights Violations Within the Mental Healthcare Model in Mexico | |
| 168th | Follow-up Mechanism for the Ayotzinapa Matter, Mexico | |
| 161st | Special follow-up Mechanism to Ayotzinapa Case in Mexico (ex-officio) | 2/3 |
| 161st | Right to the Truth in Cases involving Gross Human Rights Violations in Mexico | 2/3 |
| 161st | Human rights situation of asylum seekers and refugees in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 161st | State of Independence and Autonomy of the Justice System in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 159th | Human rights situation and forced disappearance in Mexico | 2/3 |
| 159th | Human Rights situation of indigenous peoples in Yucatan, Mexico | 3/3 |
| 159th | Human Rights situation of people affected by internal Displacement in Mexico | 2/3 |
| 159th | Situation of Trade Union Rights in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 157th/158th | General Situation of Human Rights in Mexico | 2/3 |
| 157th /158th | Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty and the Privatization of the Prison System in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 157th /158th | Missing Children and Adolescents in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 157th /158th | Access to information and indirect restrictions on freedom of expression in Mexico | 3/3 |
| 156th | Disappearances of Students of Ayotzinapa | 3/3 |
| 156th | Case of Manuel Santiz Culebra et al. (Actual Massacre) | 1/3 |
| 156th | Drug Policy | 2/3 |
| 156th | Extrajudicial Executions | 2/3 |
Voluntary financial contributions to IACHR
| Year | Contributions by Mexico | Percentage of Total Contributions to IACHR |
| 2011 | $100,000 | 2.0% |
| 2012 | $285,000 | 7.1% |
| 2013 | $305,000 | 5% |
| 2014 | $500,000 | 10% |
| 2015 | $0 | 0% |
| 2016 | $150,000 | 3.7% |
* Mexico provided 2 million USD in 2015-2016 for the execution of the project “Asistencia técnica internacional en la investigación de la desaparición forzada de 43 estudiantes en Ayotzinapa, Guerrero”. The project is executed by the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI).
[/expandableContent]
Electoral Missions
Mexico has had four OAS missions to monitor their elections. The first being in 2009 to monitor both federal and local elections, in 2012 to monitor general elections, in 2015 to again monitor federal elections, and in 2018 to monitor their presidential election.
Freedom of Information Laws
Since 2000 the right to information and freedom of information laws have expanded across the region. However, the existence of the laws on the books does not necessarily mean full enforcement.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
| Signatory/Participant in MESICIC* | Yes |
| Constitutional protection* | Yes |
| Specific law enacted* | Yes, enacted in 2002 |
| Is there a presumption of right* | Yes |
| Scope/Exceptions/Overrides* | Applies to all branches, but with different appeal processes; exceptions for information exempted by other laws; mandatory overrides. |
| Received information under FOIA law?** | 79% |
| Received information within a week?** | 66% |
| Received the appropriate information?** | 84% |
*Data taken from the Global Right to Information ratings, provided by the Center for Law and Democracy.
**Information from the 2015 World Justice Project Open Government Index
[/expandableContent]
Women’s Rights:
Protecting women against gender-based violence is a human rights issue often overlooked globally even though it crosses social, economic and national boundaries. And according to the United Nations Population Fund, gender-based violence undermines the health, security, dignity, and autonomy of its victims. Although 16 countries in Latin America had modified their laws to include a specific type of crime referring to the murder of women by 2015, they are not uniformly implemented, and practices to convict perpetrators of gender-based violence are still extremely weak. A 2016 report published by the Small Arms Survey found that Latin America and the Caribbean is home to 14 of the 25 countries with the highest rates of femicide in the world.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
Mexico’s 2007 General Law on Women’s Access to Life Free of Violence defined femicidal violence for the first time. Article 49 of the law called for the development and application of specialized protocols with a gender perspective in the immediate search of missing women and girls in cases of femicide, discrimination and trafficking. Even though the general law defined femicidal violence, the Mexican government and regulations have been vague on how the law defines femicide. The state of Chihuahua does not count the killing of women through extreme violence differently than other murders. To be counted as femicide, the victim has to show signs of sexual assault or mutilation or have experienced a history of abuse.
The exclusion of other types of femicide in the law only hinders the chances of achieving justice for the victims. The Femicide Observatory, a coalition of 43 groups that document crimes affecting women, found that only 16 percent of female homicides in 2012 and 2013 were classified as femicides—just 1.6 percent resulting in convictions. This not only makes it harder to know the actual number of female homicides, but demonstrates weak law enforcement. Currently, the female homicide rate is 3.9 per 100,000 women.
[/expandableContent]
Indigenous rights:
7.8 percent of the population in Latin America, roughly 41,813,039 people, identify as indigenous, 49 percent of them live in urban areas and 51 percent live in rural areas.
The Labour Organization’s Convention 169 (ILO 169)
The Labour Organization’s Convention 169 (ILO169)—which has the status of an international treaty—establishes the right of indigenous and tribal peoples to be consulted when a policy or project affects their culture or heritage through what is commonly called “previous and informed consent.” The vaguely worded treaty has been a point of contention in some countries, among governments, investors and communities; and progress in implementing it has been uneven. The Convention has been interpreted, in particular, as applying to issues of national resource extraction and infrastructure development that affect communal lands. In Latin America 16 countries have signed ILO 169.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People’s (UNDRIP)
Adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2007, all Latin American countries, except Colombia, which abstained, voted in favor of this declaration. The only four countries to initially reject this declaration were the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. While it is not a legally binding instrument, it is an “important standard” for the treatment of indigenous people. The declaration sets out the collective and individual rights of indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, education, and other issues. It prohibits discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them and their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own visions of economic and social development. The end goal is to encourage countries to work alongside indigenous communities to solve global issues, like development, multicultural democracy and decentralization.
American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People
In 2016, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS) approved the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples after a long negotiation of 17 years. The declaration recognizes the collective organization and multicultural character of indigenous peoples, the self-identification of people who consider themselves indigenous and special protection for peoples in voluntary isolation or initial contact. However, the declaration was met with resistance by members of the indigenous community, who complained that they did not have full participation in the negotiations and that the declaration rolled back several rights recognized in UNDRIP. The declaration does not mention the right to previous and informed consultation.
Previous to the declaration, in 1990, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) had created the Office of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to devote attention to Indigenous Peoples in the Americas and to “strengthen, promote, and systemize the IACHR’s own work in this area. The current Rapporteur on the Right of Indigenous Peoples is Francisco José Eguiguren Praeli, Ambassador of Peru to Spain from 2012 to 2014 and Minister of the Office of Justice. He received a law degree from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru with a master’s degree in Constitutional Law and a PhD in Humanities. Former Rapporteurs include, Rose-Marie Belle Antoine a former IACHR Commissioner and Dinah Shelton an international law consultant for the World Health Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme among other organizations.
[expandableHeadline]Read more[/expandableHeadline][expandableContent]
In Mexico, from 2012 to 2015, out of 500 seats in the bicameral national legislature, 14 were held by indigenous representatives, four of which were women.
According to calculations in 2010, 16,836,877 people or 15 percent of the total population, are indigenous. Fifty four percent were living in urban areas.
Mexico voted in favor of UNDRIP, the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and signed ILO 169. Mexico has struggled to implement ILO 169, where there is still no specific enabling legislation, and there is currently little movement within the national legislature to give the treaty application under Mexican law.
[/expandableContent]