REPORT No. 47/16
CASE 12.659
NOVEMBER 29, 2016



On August 2, 2001, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the
Inter-American Commission,” “the Commission” or “the IACHR”) received a petition lodged by the Comisión
de Solidaridad y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos (COSYDDHAC) and the Center for Justice and
International Law (CEJIL) (hereinafter, “the petitioners”), alleging that Mexico (hereinafter “the Mexican
State” or “the State”) is internationally liable for the alleged extrajudicial execution of Mirey Trueba Arciniega
on August 22, 1998, at the hands of a member of the military, as well as for the failure to investigate,
prosecute and punish all of the individuals responsible for the crime.
According to the petitioners, Mirey Trueba Arciniega was shot by a member of the Mexican
Army in Baborigame, municipality of Guadalupe y Calvo, State of Chihuahua. They claimed that, along with
other military members, said officer impeded the family members of Mr. Trueba from taking him to the
hospital. They contended that because of the lack of medical care, Mr. Trueba died three hours after the
events transpired. The petitioners also claimed that the investigations conducted into the case were
ineffective because not all of the persons responsible for the crimes were punished.
The Mexican State’s defense rested on the fact that the military officer, who shot Mr. Trueba,
was tried and convicted in domestic courts. The State further contended that his family received
compensation for his death. The State concluded that, consequently, it fulfilled its obligation to investigate
and punish those responsible for the crimes, as well as to provide reparation for the damages caused.
After examining the available information, the Commission concluded that the Mexican State
is responsible for the violation of the right to life, humane treatment, a fair trial and judicial protection, as
established in Article 4.1, 5.1, 8.1 and 25.1 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter, “the
American Convention” or “the Convention”), in connection with the obligations set forth in Article 1.1 and 2 of
that instrument, to the detriment of the persons named throughout the instant report. Based on these
conclusions, the IACHR made its recommendations to the Mexican State.


On August 2, 2001, the IACHR received the initial petition. The proceedings from the time
the petition was filed until the decision on admissibility was issued are explained in detail in Admissibility
Report No. 48/08 of July 24, 2008.1 In said report, the IACHR concluded that the petition was admissible with
regard to the rights set forth in Articles 2, 4, 5, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with
Article 1.1 of this instrument.
On August 4, 2008, the Commission served the parties with a copy of the admissibility
report. Additionally, it informed the parties that it was making itself available to them in order to reach a
friendly settlement in the matter. The IACHR also asked the petitioners to submit their comments on the

1 See, IACHR, Report No. 48/08, Petition 515-01, Admissibility, Mirey Trueba Arciniega, Mexico, July 24, 2008. Additionally, the
Commission recalls receiving on October 28, 2002, an agreement between the State and the victim’s family members, entered into on
September 17 of that year. The State reported that in this agreement, it was noted that the death of Mirey Trueba was likely caused by a
member of the Secretariat of National Defense and, therefore, compensation in the amount of $117,822 Mexican Pesos was awarded to
the family as reparation for moral and material damages.


Select target paragraph3