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