1.-Background. On 1st October 2010, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) notified two verdicts against the Mexican State on the cases of Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú[1]. The rulings determined that during 2002 - under different circumstances, at the age of 25 and 17 years old respectively - both women were raped and tortured by elements of the Mexican armed forces in the state of Guerrero, Mexico. The events took place in a context of poverty, discrimination, and what the Tribunal called “institutional violence by the Military”[2].
On 25 October 2010 Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú, in collaboration with their representatives, presented to the Under-Secretary of Judicial and Human Rights Affairs, Felipe Zamora, a working plan to guide and coordinate the implementation of the reparations ruled by the IACtHR.
2.- Working Methodology. The rulings in the cases of Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú established 16 and 17 resolutions respectively, ordered by the Court as reparation measures for the violations of human rights committed against them. Thus, the working plan presented includes actions for each resolution, in order to address with 7 working groups the following issues: (I)Investigation; (II) Recognition of International Responsibility; (III) Education, Health and Rehabilitation; (IV) Compensations; (V)Trainings; (VI) Legislative Reforms; (VII) and Public Policies and Community Reparations.
Each working group takes place prior notification from Mrs. Inés Fernández Ortega and Mrs. Valentina Rosendo Cantú to the Ministry of Interior, informing it which federal institutions are those who have the attribution for the implementation of the actions in each working group. These actions shall be designed and agreed in coordination with the representatives of Inés Fernández and Valentina Rosendo. In addition, the representatives of Inés and Valentina present a proposal for each resolution that is under discussion. As part of the working agreement, it was established that all State actions towards the implementation of the sentences shall be consulted and previously accorded with the victims and their representatives. Finally, due to the fact that both sentences approach parallel issues, after agreeing with the organisations and victims, there are certain actions that could be implement jointly. Those reparations that are strictly related to one individual would be discussed in close attention to those particularities that Mrs. Fernández Ortega and Mrs. Rosendo Cantú demand.
3.- Launch of the Working groups. On 15 March 2011, five months after the official presentation of the working plan, an official act took place at the Ministry of Interior to launch the working groups. In representation of the State attended Felipe de J. Zamora Castro, Under-Secretary of Legal and Human Rights Affairs, from the Ministry of Interior; Ambassador Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, Under-Secretary of Multilateral and Human Rights Affairs, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Jorge Alberto Lara Rivera, Deputy-General Attorney of Legal and International Projects from the General Attorney’s Office; and Ricardo Celis Aguilar Álvarez, Deputy Legal Advisor on Constitutional Control and Litigious, from the Legal Advising Team of the Presidency. As an honour witness, Javier Hernández Valencia, Representative in Mexico of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights attended; in addition to representatives of Embassies and civil society organisations.
In order to officialise the process, a minute along with the Working Plan were subscribed by the Under-Secretary of Legal and Human Rights Affairs, Felipe de J. Zamora Castro from the Ministry of Interior and the Under-Secretary of Multilateral and Human Rights Affairs, Ambassador Juan Manuel Gómez Robledo, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The first issue that Mrs. Fernández Ortega and Mrs. Rosendo Cantú requested to approach was Education and Health[3]. The working groups for complying with the sentences started on 5 April 2011, to date, no information on the results has been received.
Subsequently, on 7 April 2011, Inés and Valentina requested formally to the Ministry of Interior to summon to the first working group on the issue of Justice[4]. However, it was until 19 May when the first meeting was convened. Unfortunately, the working group did not take place in compliance with the resolutions of the Court, as the General Attorney’s Office (PGR) in open contempt to the rulings of the Court refused to request the investigations into both cases that were under the Military General Attorney’s Office (PGJM). Therefore, on 28 July 2011, Inés and Valentina presented, respectively, before the General Attorney’s Office and the Military General Attorney’s Office, an official document requesting their cases to be investigated under civilian ordinary jurisdiction and not under the military one. On 12 August 2011, the Military General Attorney’s Office officially notified that both investigations have been sent to the General Attorney’s Office; consequently, a request to the Under-Secretary of Legal and Human Rights Affairs to convene a new meeting to address the course of action on the working group on Justice was sent; no official response has been received.
Furthermore, on 11 July 2011, the rulings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the cases of Rosendo Cantú et al. vs. Mexico and Fernández Ortega et al. vs Mexico, were published on the Official Paper of the Federation without prior notification to any of the beneficiaries or their representatives.
Due to the lack of information received and the lack of results on the implementation of the sentences, on 12 July, Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú, respectively, requested to have a meeting with the Under-Secretary of Legal and Human Rights Affairs, Felipe Zamora, in order for providing them information on the process of complying. It was until 25 August, when a meeting was convened for the upcoming 1st September; the meeting will take place if prior minimum agreements are reached.
4.- Budget. It is important to recall that under the Federal Expenditure Budget for fiscal year 2011, 30 million pesos were designated for complying with the verdicts of the Court and the reparations in the cases of Rosendo Radilla, “Cotton Fields”, Valentina Rosendo, Inés Fernández and Rodolfo Montiel and Teodoro Cabrera, which allows to the Federal Government to distribute those expenditures in order to fulfil the requested actions, within the framework of compliance with the rulings.
[1] The sentences in favour to Inés Fernández Ortega and Valentina Rosendo Cantú were dictated by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on 30 and 31 August 2010, respectively and notified on 1 October 2010 to the parties.
[2] Cfr. IACtHR. Case of Fernández-Ortega et al. v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 30, 2010. Series C No. 215, par.79. And, IACtHR. Case of Rosendo-Cantú and other v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2010. Series C No. 216, par. 71.
[3] On the reparation regarding education, the rulings order the State to provide scholarships in Mexican public institutions for the children of Inés Fernández Ortega and for Valentina Rosendo Cantú and her daughter. The scholarships include not only access to education, but also all related necessities to have real and effective conditions to conclude with their studies, according to their interests. Regarding Health and rehabilitation reparations, the rulings establish that the State shall provide medical and psychological attention needed for the victims, addressing those special needs and circumstances of each one of the beneficiaries. The treatments shall be provided until needed, and should cover the costs of medicine, transportation, translators, when needed, and of any other direct related costs strictly needed.
[4] The Court resolved that the State shall conduct efficient investigation to determine, within reasonable time, the corresponding criminal responsibilities and sanction them effectively, in compliance with the law. Furthermore, the Tribunal ruled that the investigations should be effective under ordinary jurisdiction, with due gender and cultural perspective, and all the conditions of security which allow the fully participation of the victims.