39
relative at that time was detained, we had to disappear from the region in order to avoid
being arrested.”103
B.
The context in which the facts of the present case occurred
132. It has been documented that at the time at which Mr. Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco was
detained and disappeared numerous forced disappearances of persons occurred throughout
the Mexican territory.104 Thus, it can be concluded from the body of evidence that the
National Human Rights Commission of Mexico,105 within the framework of the Special
Program for Alleged Disappeared Persons,106 examined 532 case files of complaints
regarding the forced disappearance of persons perpetrated during the “[p]henomena
classified as the ‘Dirty war of the seventies’.”107 Based on that investigation, the National
Commission issued Recommendation 026/2001,108 in which it indicated that it had sufficient
elements to conclude that in at least 275 cases of those examined the several of the rights
of those people reported as disappeared were violated.109
103
Cf. Complaint filed before the Agent of the Public Prosecutors’ Office of the Common Jurisdiction of the city
of Atoyac de Álvarez, Guerrero, on May 14, 1999 (dossier of appendixes to the brief of pleadings and motions,
appendix D(20), folios 1906 through 1907).
104
Cf. Recommendation 026/2001 of the National Human Rights Commission (dossier of appendixes to the
application, appendix 3, folio 871; dossier of appendixes to the respondent’s plea, appendix V(2), page 1) and
Historical Report for the Mexican Society, Special Prosecutors’ Office for Social and Political Movements of the Past.
Attorney General of the Republic, 2006 (dossier of appendixes to the application, appendix 4, pages 503 through
530).
105
On June 6, 1990 the National Human Rights Commission was created through a presidential decree as a
decentralized body of the Secretariat of the Interior (dossier on merits, volume III, appendix V(1), folios 845 and
846). Subsequently, through a reform to Article 102, section B, of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican
States, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on September 13, 1999, said body was granted
constitutional status (dossier of appendixes to the respondent’s plea, appendix V(4), pages 1 and 2).
106
The Constituent Council of the National Human Rights Commission agreed the “[c]reation of a program
addressed to the search of missing persons,” after which on September 18, 1990 the Special Program for the
Alleged Disappeared Persons was created. Cf. Recommendation 026/2001 of the National Human Rights
Commission (dossier of appendixes to the respondent’s plea, appendix V(2), page 1)
107
To these effects, said National Commission carried out field investigations and had direct contact with the
next of kin of the disappeared, gathered documents in the General Archive of the Nation, the National Library and
Newspaper Library, the Library of the Attorney General of the Republic, the Mexico Library, and the Archives of the
Center of National Research and Security Center, requested information from the Attorney General of the Republic
on aggrieved parties and the complaints filed, it analyzed case files and carried out visual inspections at different
governmental instances, among others. Cf. Recommendation 026/2001 of the National Human Rights Commission
(dossier of appendixes to the application, appendix 3, folios 871, 872, and 889, and dossier of appendixes to the
respondent’s plea, appendix V(2), pages 1, 2, 17, and 18). The Report of the Special Prosecutors’ Office states that
the period called “dirty war” is named this way in direct reference to the way in which the counterinsurgence
actions were carried out to contain armed groups considered violators of the law. Cf. Historical Report for the
Mexican Society, Special Prosecutors’ Office for Social and Political Movements of the Past. Attorney General of the
Republic, 2006 (dossier of appendixes to the application, appendix 4, page 279).
108
The recommendation was issued based on that stated in Articles 102, section B, of the Political
Constitution of the United Mexican States; 1, 3, 6, fractions I, II, III; 15, fraction VII; 24, fraction IV, 44, 46, and
51 of the Law of the National Human Rights Commission. Cf. Recommendation 026/2001 of the National Human
Rights Commission (dossier of appendixes to the application, appendix 3, folio 873, and dossier of appendixes to
the respondent’s plea, appendix V(2), page 3)
109
Cf. Recommendation 026/2001 of the National Human Rights Commission (dossier of appendixes to the
application, appendix 3, folio 872; dossier of appendixes to the respondent’s plea, appendix V(2), page 2).
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents