REPORT Nº 75/07 PETITION 12.322 ADMISSIBILITY ANTONIO GONZÁLEZ MÉNDEZ MEXICO 17 October 2007 I. SUMMARY 1. On August 10, 2000, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “IACHR”) received a complaint filed by the “Fray Bartolomé de las Casas” Human Rights Center A.C (hereinafter “the petitioners”), alleging the international responsibility of the United Mexican States (hereinafter “the State”) for the presumed forced disappearance of Antonio González Méndez and the subsequent failure to investigate the case. The petitioners claimed that the acts denounced constituted violations of the rights established in Articles 4, 5, 8, 17, and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights (“the American Convention”) considered in relation to the obligations set forth in Article 1(1) of that international instrument. 2. The petitioners alleged that Antonio González Méndez was an indigenous person who belonged to the Ch’ol ethnic group, and at the time the events occurred, he was affiliated with the Democratic Revolutionary Party [Partido de la Revolución Democrática] (PRD), a member of the civilian grassroots support for the Zapatista National Liberation Army [Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional] (EZLN), and in charge of the “Arroyo Frío” cooperative store in his community, El Calvario, in the Municipality of Sabanilla, Chiapas. They reported that on January 18, 1999, he left his home in the company of Juan Regino López Leoporto, apparently for the purpose of buying a firearm, and his whereabouts have been unknown since then, despite the many complaints filed by the petitioners. In support of the admissibility of this complaint, the petitioners argued that in this case, domestic remedies were duly exhausted, as the petitioners filed a writ of amparo for constitutional protection, registered as case No. 238/99, which was rejected on April 22, 1999. Similarly, they alleged that they had reported these facts to the appropriate authorities, resulting in Pretrial Investigation Nº AL41/SIJ/030/99. According to the petitioners, that investigation was still open at the time this petition was lodged with the IACHR. 3. The State in turn argued that the petitioners had not exhausted all domestic legal remedies, because the investigations initiated in conjunction with the alleged disappearance of Antonio González Méndez were still pending resolution. 4. After examining the positions of the parties, the Commission, without prejudice to the merits of the case, concludes that it is competent to consider the petition filed by the petitioners, and that therefore the case is admissible in relation to the alleged violations of the rights contained in Articles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 25 and the general obligation established in Article 2 of the American Convention, as related to Article 1(1) of that international instrument; it further declares that this petition is inadmissible in reference to the alleged violation of the right contained in Article 17 of the American Convention. All of the foregoing is considered in light of the provisions of Articles 41, 46, and 47 of the Convention, and Article 37 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. The Commission therefore decides to notify the parties of its decision and to pursue an analysis of the merits of the case related to the alleged violations of the American Convention, and to publish this Admissibility Report and include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. 1

Select target paragraph3