DOCSLIB.ORG

Dangerous Territory Mexico Still Not Safe for Refugees

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dangerous Territory Mexico Still Not Safe for Refugees Dangerous Territory Mexico Still Not Safe for Refugees July 2017 ON HUMAN RIGHTS, the United States must be a beacon. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Activists fighting for freedom around the globe continue to This report was written and researched by Eleanor Acer and look to us for inspiration and count on us for support. B. Shaw Drake. David Mizner, Meredith Kucherov, and Upholding human rights is not only a moral obligation; it’s a Jennifer Quigley contributed edits to the report. Sarah vital national interest. America is strongest when our policies Graham designed the report. Caroline Wengeler provided and actions match our values. additional desk research and support. We are grateful for the Human Rights First is an independent advocacy and action invaluable support for Mr. Drake’s fellowship from Equal organization that challenges America to live up to its ideals. Justice Works and fellowship sponsors Morgan Stanley and We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP. Human Rights First also for human rights so we press the U.S. government and thanks the Oak Foundation, the Libra Foundation, the private companies to respect human rights and the rule of Heising-Simons Foundation, the Open Society Policy law. When they don’t, we step in to demand reform, Center, and the Simmons Sisters Fund of The Dallas accountability, and justice. Around the world, we work where Foundation for their support of the organization’s research we can best harness American influence to secure core and advocacy on access to asylum. We are thankful to all freedoms. the practitioners, organizations, and experts that provided information to inform this report. We know that it is not enough to expose and protest injustice, so we create the political environment and policy COVER PHOTO: Jose CABEZAS/AFP/Getty Images solutions necessary to ensure consistent respect for human rights. Whether we are protecting refugees, combating torture, or defending persecuted minorities, we focus not on making a point, but on making a difference. For over 30 years, we’ve built bipartisan coalitions and teamed up with frontline activists and lawyers to tackle issues that demand American leadership. Human Rights First is a nonprofit, nonpartisan international human rights organization based in New York and Washington D.C. To maintain our independence, we accept no government funding. © 2017 Human Rights First All Rights Reserved. This report is available online at humanrightsfirst.org Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Kidnappings, Disappearance, Trafficking, and Sexual Assault .......................................... 3 Refoulement and Suppression of Asylum Claims ................................................................ 4 Mexican Asylum System Lacks National Reach and Capacity to Timely Adjudicate Cases .............................................................................. 6 Mexican Asylum System Leaves Many Refugees Unprotected .......................................... 6 Detention Used to Punish Asylum Seekers .......................................................................... 8 Detention and Refoulement of Children, Families, LGBTI Persons and other Vulnerable Populations ......................................................... 9 Gaps in Long Term Integration Initiatives ........................................................................... 10 Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 10 Endnotes ................................................................................................................................ 12 DANGEROUS TERRITORY 1 Introduction press Mexico to “manage” the border without any public affirmation of the importance of Earlier this year the Trump Administration and its international law and treaty commitments that Congressional allies advanced proposals to foist prohibit the return of refugees to persecution. At U.S. refugee protection obligations onto Mexico the June 2017 “Conference on Prosperity and and to block from the United States non-Mexican Security in Central America” in Miami, Mexican refugees and asylum seekers who pass through and U.S. authorities agreed to “explore Mexico. These moves would undermine U.S. enhancements to border security,” again without global leadership and violate American legal mentioning refugee protection.1 commitments even if Mexico had a strong refugee To assess the degree of refugee protection in protection system. They are all the more Mexico and determine how to improve it dangerous because Mexico doesn’t. Amid mass regionally, Human Rights First researchers displacement caused by rampant human rights traveled to Mexico in June 2017. They interviewed abuses and violence in the Northern Triangle of human rights monitors, nonprofit lawyers, U.N. Central America, these proposals would force staff, other aid agency staff, the Mexican thousands of refugees to return to or remain in a Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR), country deeply unsafe for them. Mexico’s asylum adjudication agency, and the President Trump’s January 25th Executive Order National Commission of Human Rights (CNDH). “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement (Their request to meet with the National Institute Improvements” proposed to return some border of Migration (INM), Mexico’s immigration arrivals to “contiguous territories,” such as Mexico, enforcement agency, went unanswered.) Human while they await U.S. immigration court removal Rights First also gathered information from hearings. In the wake of this order and the refugees, attorneys, and aid workers during visits President’s other executive order relating to to Mexico in March and May 2017, and from refugees, some U.S. agents on the southern refugees who, after passing through Mexico, border have told people seeking protection that received assistance through Human Rights First’s the United States is no longer accepting asylum pro bono legal representation program. seekers and, as documented in a May 2017 Human Rights First has concluded that Mexico is Human Rights First report, illegally turned some far from a “safe third country” for refugees. Key away in violation of U.S. law and treaties. findings: In addition, legislative proposals would change n Migrants and refugees face acute risks of U.S. law to require asylum denials to many kidnapping, disappearance, sexual refugees who travel through Mexico, even if they assault, trafficking, and other grave harms lack actual protection there, and allow the in Mexico. Asylum seekers and migrants are Secretary of Homeland Security to declare Mexico targeted for kidnapping and killing in Mexico. a “safe third country” to which the United States Some have been trafficked into forced labor. would return refugees, barring them from seeking They are targeted not only due to their protection through the U.S. asylum process. inherent vulnerabilities as refugees and In April 2017, Mexico’s Foreign Minister Luis migrants, but also due to their nationality, Videgaray announced that Mexico wouldn’t accept race, gender, sexual orientation, and gender non-Mexicans turned away or removed from the identity. Refugee and migrant women and United States. Yet the United States continues to girls have been trafficked to Mexico’s HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST DANGEROUS TERRITORY 2 southern border, where they are exploited in refugees reside. COMAR is massively under- the bars and nightclubs that cater to the many resourced and lacks the staffing levels police, military, and other security forces in necessary to adjudicate these protection the area. Even asylum seekers and refugees requests in a timely manner, forcing many granted protection in Mexico remain at risk applicants to wait long periods. from persecutors with transnational reach. n Deficiencies, barriers, and flaws in the n Mexican migration officers deport Central Mexican asylum system leave many Americans who have expressed fear of refugees unprotected. There has been return despite the country’s progress in the Mexican asylum system since nonrefoulement and human rights its launch in 2011, including a recent obligations. Refugees who fear persecution alternatives-to-detention initiative and are often deported back to danger. In some increased recognition rates. However, cases, people in need of protection are not substantial deficiencies, barriers, and flaws even aware that they can apply for asylum in persist. Refugees are blocked from protection Mexico. When asylum seekers express a fear under an untenable 30-day filing deadline, of return, INM agents often do not take the denied protection by COMAR officers who steps necessary to allow them to apply for claim that refugees targeted by groups with asylum. In many cases, officers actively national reach can safely relocate within their discourage or pressure Central Americans countries, and discouraged from pursuing held in migration detention from applying for their claims by INM agents at detention asylum regardless of their expressed fears of facilities and at the border. The system also return. In January through October 2016, only suffers from a lack of sufficient nonprofit legal five percent of the 130,000 Central Americans counsel and exceedingly onerous registration apprehended in Mexico applied for asylum.2 requirements that often prevent lawyers from Only 138 of the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S
    Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S. Foreign Policy October 2020 Acknowledgments Human Rights First is a nonprofit, nonpartisan human rights advocacy and action organization based in Washington D.C., New York, and Los Angeles. © 2020 Human Rights First. All Rights Reserved. Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S. Foreign Policy was authored by Human Rights First’s staff and consultants. Senior Vice President for Policy Rob Berschinski served as lead author and editor-in-chief, assisted by Tolan Foreign Policy Legal Fellow Reece Pelley and intern Anna Van Niekerk. Contributing authors include: Eleanor Acer Scott Johnston Trevor Sutton Rob Berschinski David Mizner Raha Wala Cole Blum Reece Pelley Benjamin Haas Rita Siemion Significant assistance was provided by: Chris Anders Steven Feldstein Stephen Pomper Abigail Bellows Becky Gendelman Jennifer Quigley Brittany Benowitz Ryan Kaminski Scott Roehm Jim Bernfield Colleen Kelly Hina Shamsi Heather Brandon-Smith Kate Kizer Annie Shiel Christen Broecker Kennji Kizuka Mandy Smithberger Felice Gaer Dan Mahanty Sophia Swanson Bishop Garrison Kate Martin Yasmine Taeb Clark Gascoigne Jenny McAvoy Bailey Ulbricht Liza Goitein Sharon McBride Anna Van Niekerk Shannon Green Ian Moss Human Rights First challenges the United States of America to live up to its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle for human dignity and the rule of law, and so we focus our advocacy on the U.S. government and other key actors able to leverage U.S. influence. When the U.S. government falters in its commitment to promote and protect human rights, we step in to demand reform, accountability, and justice.
    [Show full text]
  • March 12, 2021 Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas Hon. Antony Blinken Secretary Secretary Department of Homeland Security Department Of
    March 12, 2021 Hon. Alejandro Mayorkas Hon. Antony Blinken Secretary Secretary Department of Homeland Security Department of State 301 7th Street, SW 2201 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20528 Washington, DC 20520 CC: Esther Olavarria, Domestic Policy Council Roberta Jacobson, National Security Council Katie Tobin, National Security Council Re: Wind Down of the Migrant Protection Protocols Dear Secretaries Mayorkas and Blinken: Our faith-based, humanitarian, legal services, immigration, and human rights organizations and law school clinics welcome the administration’s initial steps to wind down the illegal and cruel Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). We applaud the humane reception of the more than 1,400 asylum seekers brought to safety in the United States to date, the rapid processing of asylum seekers in the Matamoros tent encampment, and reported discussions to expand MPP processing to additional ports of entry. The recent designation of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuela is also a crucial and long overdue measure that will safeguard thousands of refugees from deportation. We write to recommend additional actions by the administration as the process to end MPP continues and to request further engagement and coordination to ensure people seeking refugee protection can find safety in the United States. We urge the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to immediately extend MPP processing to additional ports of entry and U.S. consulates, quickly expand processing to all individuals subjected to MPP, better coordinate with bi-national humanitarian and legal service providers assisting asylum seekers, provide necessary support for border communities welcoming asylum seekers, and address continued issues with the registration process.
    [Show full text]
  • The Protection of Human Rights in the Mexican
    THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE MEXICAN REPUBLICANISM CARLOS ALBERTO AGUILAR BLANCAS1 Abstract: Democracy is not only a procedure of choice and citizen participation, but also a set of values that affirm freedom and citizen’s rights. The reform of 2011 rose to constitutional rank the defence, protection and promotion of human rights, representing an unprecedented historic breakthrough. With these reforms, Mexico seeks to consolidate its constitutional system adapting it to reality, increasing its cultural diversity, values and traditions that have been shaping the Mexican identity. The full knowledge of their rights produces a citizenship aware of them, which, even for Mexico, is a long-term task. KEYWORDS: State, Government, Mexican Constitutional Law, Human Rights, International Law, Sovereignty. Summary: I. INTRODUCTION; II. AN APPROACH TO THE RULE OF LAW IN MEXICO; II.1. General aspects of the rule of law; II.2. Rule of law in Mexico; III. SCOPE OF CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM IN THE FIELD OF HUMAN RIGHTS FROM 2011; III.1. Aspects of the reform in the field of human rights, III.2. Jurisdictional implications of the reform in the field of human rights; III.3. Realities and prospects of human rights in Mexico; IV. CONCLUSIONS; V. REFERENCES. I. INTRODUCTION The constitutional state is characterized by the defence of the fundamental rights of individuals, in contrast to the classic constitutionalism, which sought the political freedom of the citizens against the public abuse of power (SCHMITT, 1992: 138), i.e., in those days it was reflected that there was not a bourgeois rule of law, that there was no individual rights and the separation or division of powers was not established.
    [Show full text]
  • The Zimbabwean Human Rights Crisis: a Collaborative Approach to International Advocacy
    Davidson and Purohit: The Zimbabwean Human Rights Crisis: A Collaborative Approach to International Advocacy Note from the Field The Zimbabwean Human Rights Crisis: A Collaborative Approach to International Advocacy Lorna Davidson and Raj Purohitt Over the past several years, a serious human rights crisis has developed in Zimbabwe, where President Robert Mugabe employs repressive measures to cling to power. Civil society and human rights groups in Zimbabwe are among those who have come under attack by the government, and they face an extremely difficult challenge in bringing about positive change in the country. This article describes the development of the current crisis in Zimbabwe, focusing on the problems faced by local activists and organizations that seek to promote greater respect for human rights. It further discusses one recent initiative launched by the U.S.-based organization Human Rights First,which organized a consultative meeting of regional civil society groups in August 2003. The article addresses the role that can and should be played by internationalcivil society organizations, which must be sensitive to the contextual dynamics particularto the Zimbabwean crisis and to the region. If they are to be in any way effective, such organizations must act in supportof local actors and stronger regional networks. t Lorna Davidson is a Senior Associate in the Human Rights Defenders Program at Human Rights First in New York, N.Y, and Raj Purohit is the Legislative Director in the Washington, D.C. Office of Human Rights First. Human Rights First is the new name for the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights as of February 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 June 8, 2020 to Members of The
    June 8, 2020 To Members of the United Nations Human Rights Council Re: Request for the Convening of a Special Session on the Escalating Situation of Police Violence and Repression of Protests in the United States Excellencies, The undersigned family members of victims of police killings and civil society organizations from around the world, call on member states of the UN Human Rights Council to urgently convene a Special Session on the situation of human rights in the United States in order to respond to the unfolding grave human rights crisis borne out of the repression of nationwide protests. The recent protests erupted on May 26 in response to the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was only one of a recent string of unlawful killings of unarmed Black people by police and armed white vigilantes. We are deeply concerned about the escalation in violent police responses to largely peaceful protests in the United States, which included the use of rubber bullets, tear gas, pepper spray and in some cases live ammunition, in violation of international standards on the use of force and management of assemblies including recent U.N. Guidance on Less Lethal Weapons. Additionally, we are greatly concerned that rather than using his position to serve as a force for calm and unity, President Trump has chosen to weaponize the tensions through his rhetoric, evidenced by his promise to seize authority from Governors who fail to take the most extreme tactics against protestors and to deploy federal armed forces against protestors (an action which would be of questionable legality).
    [Show full text]
  • Targeted Sanctions Overview Primer
    FACT SHEET: NOVEMBER 2020 Targeted Human Rights and Anti-Corruption Sanctions – A General Overview Part 1 in HRF’s Guide to US Targeted Sanctions for Combatting Human Rights Abuses and Corruption law in US history. In December 2017, the Introduction to US Targeted Sanctions USG issued EO 13818, which • The United States government (USG) simultaneously implemented the GMA and maintains several targeted sanctions expanded its scope, creating the Global programs to create accountability for human Magnitsky sanctions program. rights abusers and corrupt officials across o EO 13818 gives discretionary authority to the globe. Among the most widely used are the Secretaries of Treasury and State to Global Magnitsky sanctions (for more block or revoke US visas and to block information, see Part 2 of this series), 7031(c) (freeze) all US-based property and visa sanctions (for more information, see Part 3 interests in property of foreign persons of this series), and country-specific programs (both individuals and entities) who have with relevant human rights and anti-corruption engaged in: prongs (for more information, see Parts 4-20 of a) “serious human rights abuse” (SHRA) this series). b) “acts of corruption,” including the • Purpose of targeted sanctions: Targeted transfer or the facilitation of the transfer sanctions aim to encourage behavior of the proceeds of corruption. modification, limit the impunity of perpetrators, o The USG is required by law to involve deter covered crimes, and achieve diplomatic NGOs in Global Magnitsky sanctions goals
    [Show full text]
  • October 23, 2020 Submitted Via
    October 23, 2020 Submitted via www.regulations.gov Lauren Alder Reid, Assistant Director Office of Policy Executive Office for Immigration Review 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2616 Falls Church, VA 22041 RE: RIN 1125–AA93; EOIR Docket No. 19–0010; A.G. Order No. 4843–2020, Public Comment Opposing Proposed Rules on Procedures for Asylum and Withholding of Removal Human Rights First submits this comment urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) to withdraw these proposed rules in their entirety. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) would further eviscerate procedural protections for asylum seekers1 in removal proceedings, making it more difficult for refugees to find safety in the United States. The proposed rule would create a 15-day filing deadline for asylum applications for those in asylum-only proceedings, making it virtually impossible for many refugees to obtain counsel or fully develop their asylum claims. The proposed rule would require immigration judges to adjudicate most asylum applications within 180 days of filing with very limited exceptions for continuances, which could block asylum seekers from finding counsel or fully preparing their cases. Further, the rule would require immigration judges to reject asylum applications for even minor errors in completing the application form or for failing to pay an unprecedented $50 asylum fee with no exceptions for detained or indigent persons. Many asylum seekers arrive in the United States with limited financial resources. Finally, the proposed rule would allow immigration judges to submit evidence in asylum proceedings – further undermining their role in fairly developing the record and serving as neutral decision makers – and it instructs judges to consider U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Human Rights Defense
    International Human Rights Defense Act Supporters: Amnesty International, Council for Global Equality, RFK Center for Human Rights, Human Rights Campaign, Freedom House, Human Rights First, American Jewish World Service, National Center for Transgender Equality, International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce, and Advocates for Youth In 2013, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) equality movement experienced a number of major triumphs, including the overturning of DOMA. Yet, in other countries, the global movement for equality suffered a number of serious setbacks. Russia enacted a ban on arbitrarily-defined “homosexual propaganda,” endangering the position of many LGBT persons and their allies. India’s Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling and reinstated the nation’s criminalization of homosexuality in the world’s second largest country. And Nigeria went even further, passing a law that makes homosexuality a crime punishable by death. Sadly, in 2014 the trend has continued abroad. Uganda passed a similar law to Nigeria’s and Ethiopia has indicated that it may do the same. It is critical that the United States fight for LGBT equality both at home, and abroad. The President, as well as both Secretaries Clinton and Kerry have affirmed the United States’ commitment to LGBT equality as a critical component of our international human rights objectives. However, our government does not yet have a comprehensive strategy for addressing LGBT discrimination overseas. We do not even have one central individual office responsible for inter-bureau and inter-agency coordination to achieve these objectives. The International Human Rights Defense Act would direct the Department of State to make international LGBT human rights a foreign policy priority and would establish a position in the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor responsible for coordinating that effort.
    [Show full text]
  • Statements and Press Releases Issued by Amnesty International During The
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I PRESS RELEASES 1. UN Commission on Human Rights: Time for concrete action (13 March 2003) …………………………………………………………………… 3 2. Nepal: Code of Conduct and the Protection of the Human Rights (21 March 2003) …………………………………………………………………… 4 3. UN Commission on Human Rights: Iraq (26 March 2003) ……………………….. 6 4. UN Commission on Human Rights: Thorough discussion on Iraq essential (27 March 2003) …………………………………………………………………… 7 5. Democratic Republic of Congo: End the use of child soldiers (31 March 2003) …………………………………………………………………… 7 6. Sudan: Urgent need for continued human rights monitoring (joint press release) (1 April 2003) …………………………………………………………………… 9 7. North Korea: Human Rights Concerns (11 April 2003) ………………………… 11 8. 1,526 executed in 2002 (11 April 2003) ……………………………………….... 14 9. Somalia: Amnesty International calls on the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to support human rights reconstruction (15 April 2003) ……….. 16 10. UN Commission on Human Rights: Defeat of Chechnya resolution extremely disappointing (17 April 2003) …………………………………………………... 18 11. UN Commission on Human Rights: Universality under threat over sexual orientation resolution (22 April 2003) ………………………………………….. 19 12. Standing Invitations to Thematic Human Rights Mechanisms (joint press release) (24 April 2003) ………………………………………………………………...…. 22 13. UN Commission on Human Rights fails once again to protect victims of human rights violations (25 April 2003) ………………………………………… 23 AI Index: IOR 41/016/2003 Amnesty International August 2003 2 Statements and press releases issued during the 59th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights 14. UN Commission on Human Rights must commit to protect human rights …..….. 27 II ORAL STATEMENTS 1. Oral statement on the human rights situation in Colombia, delivered under agenda item “Organization of the work of the session (Colombia)” …………… 29 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Migration and Human Rights at Mexico's Southern Border
    The Neglected Border: Migration and Human Rights at Mexico's Southern Border The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Bahena Juarez, Jessica. 2019. The Neglected Border: Migration and Human Rights at Mexico's Southern Border. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42004203 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use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
    [Show full text]
  • July 21, 2020 Mr. Paulo Abrão Executive Secretary Inter-American
    School of Law Immigration and Deportation Clinic 2130 Fulton Street San Francisco, CA 94117-1080 Tel 415.422.6171 Fax 415.422.6433 www.usfca.edu/law [email protected] July 21, 2020 Mr. Paulo Abrão Executive Secretary Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1889 F St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 RE: Request for Thematic Hearing During 177th Period of Sessions of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Addressing Systemic Human Rights Violations in the Region Resulting from Measures Implemented by the United States, in Cooperation with Mexico, Impeding Access to International and Humanitarian Protection. Distinguished Secretary Abrão: We, the undersigned organizations represent a regional coalition of 41 organizations that advocate for the protection of individuals seeking asylum at the United States southern border. Collectively, our organizations are based in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and the United States. We submit this request for a multi-country thematic hearing to address the wide-ranging impacts of U.S. migration policy in recent years on migrants, refugees, and unaccompanied children throughout the region, bringing particular attention to the policies enacted since the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic that have devastating consequences for access to international and humanitarian protection. A hearing would bring much needed international attention to the human rights violations experienced by migrants in the region and provide the Commission with important information on U.S. immigration measures that were not yet in effect during the Commission’s 2019 visit to the U.S. southern border. More importantly, this request differs from the thematic hearings held in 20191 by 1See IACHR 173rd Period of Session: “Limitations on Access to Asylum and Refuge in the United States for Citizens of the Northern Triangle Countries” September 24, 2019; “Reports of Violations of the Human Rights of 1 also focusing on the unusual and extreme measures enacted by the governments of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom in the World Report 2020
    Mexico | Freedom House Page 1 of 23 MexicoFREEDOM IN THE WORLD 2020 62 PARTLY FREE /100 Political Rights 27 Civil Liberties 35 63 Partly Free Global freedom statuses are calculated on a weighted scale. See the methodology. Overview https://freedomhouse.org/country/mexico/freedom-world/2020 3/6/2020 Mexico | Freedom House Page 2 of 23 Mexico has been an electoral democracy since 2000, and alternation in power between parties is routine at both the federal and state levels. However, the country suffers from severe rule of law deficits that limit full citizen enjoyment of political rights and civil liberties. Violence perpetrated by organized criminals, corruption among government officials, human rights abuses by both state and nonstate actors, and rampant impunity are among the most visible of Mexico’s many governance challenges. Key Developments in 2019 • President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who took office in 2018, maintained high approval ratings through much of the year, and his party consolidated its grasp on power in June’s gubernatorial and local elections. López Obrador’s polling position began to wane late in the year, as Mexico’s dire security situation affected voters’ views on his performance. • In March, the government created a new gendarmerie, the National Guard, which officially began operating in June after drawing from Army and Navy police forces. Rights advocates criticized the agency, warning that its creation deepened the militarization of public security. • The number of deaths attributed to organized crime remained at historic highs in 2019, though the rate of acceleration slowed. Massacres of police officers, alleged criminals, and civilians were well-publicized as the year progressed.
    [Show full text]