REPORT No. 62/19
CASE 12.322
MERITS
ANTONIO GONZÁLEZ MÉNDEZ
MEXICO
May 4, 2019
I.
INTRODUCTION
1.
On August 10, 2000, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Commission,” “the Commission” or “the IACHR”) received a petition lodged by the Centro de
Derechos Humanos Fray Bartolomé de las Casas A.C. (hereinafter “the petitioner”), 1 alleging international
responsibility of the United Mexican States (hereinafter “the Mexican State,” “the State” or “Mexico”) for the
presumed forced disappearance of Antonio González Méndez and the subsequent failure to investigate the case
to his detriment and to the detriment of his wife Sonia López Juárez and their four children, Ana González López,
Magdalena González López, Gerardo González López and Elma Talía González López (hereinafter “the alleged
victims”).
2.
The Commission approved Report on Admissibility No. 75/07 on October 15, 2007.2 On October 24,
2007, the Commission served notice of this report to the parties, who were granted the time to submit their
additional observations on the merits, as provided by the Rules of Procedure. Both parties submitted
observations on the merits. Both the petitioners and the State expressed in 2007 their willingness to undertake
the friendly settlement process though, in the end, no agreement was reached and, therefore, the IACHR
decided to carry on with the processing of the case. All information received from each party was duly
forwarded to the opposing party.
II.
ALLEGATIONS OF THE PARTIES
A. Petitioner
3.
The petitioner denounced the forced disappearance of Antonio González Méndez, which allegedly took
place on January 18, 1999 and was carried out by one or several members of the paramilitary group “Paz y
Justicia” or “Desarrollo Paz y Justicia” (hereinafter “Paz y Justicia”), which operated in northern Chiapas state,
Mexico, with the tolerance and acquiescence of the Mexican State.
4.
According to the allegation, this disappearance was not an isolated incident, but instead was part of a
context of actions carried out by armed paramilitary groups operating in Chiapas since 1995. It claims that
paramilitary activity in Chiapas ensued as a consequence of the “1994 Chiapas Campaign Plan” (Plan de
Campaña Chiapas 1994), which was designed by the Secretariat of National Defense (SEDENA), in an attempt
“to secretly organize certain sectors of civil society” in order to “break the relationship of support that existed
between the population and law-breakers.” The petitioner contends that this plan was put into effect after the
uprising of the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) against the State and the Mexican Army in January
1994 and the subsequent increase in the opposition to the government of the Institutional Revolutionary Party
(PRI), whose control over the municipalities of Chiapas was under threat. It argues that, in this context, the
State facilitated the creation of illegal paramilitary groups, such as Paz y Justicia, and enabled them to operate
with impunity in the region where the victim disappeared, thus posing a direct and certain risk to the local
population.
In a letter of October 12, 2001, the petitioner advised that the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) was joining the proceedings
as co-petitioner. However, in a communication of November 15, 2016, CEJIL gave notice that it would not be continuing to provide the legal
representation of the victims.
2 IACHR. Report No. 75/07. Case No. 12.322. Antonio González Méndez. Mexico. October 15, 2007. The petition was declared admissible
with respect to Articles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with the obligations set forth in Articles 1.1 and 2 of
the same instrument. The IACHR also found the petition inadmissible with respect to Article 17 of the Convention.
1
1