REPORT No. 67/15 1 PETITION 211-07 ADMISSIBILITY JORGE MARCIAL TZOMPAXTLE TECPILE ET AL MEXICO OCTOBER 27, 2015 I. SUMMARY 1. On February 23, 2007 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission,” “the Commission,” or “the IACHR“) received a petition presented by the Red Solidaria Década Contra la Impunidad [Solidarity Network of the Decade Against Impunity] (hereinafter “the petitioner”), representing Jorge Marcial Tzompaxtle Tecpile, Gerardo Tzompaxtle Tecpile, and Gustavo Robles López (hereinafter “the alleged victims”), the first two from the Nahuatl indigenous people. The petition was presented against the United Mexican States (hereinafter “the State” or “Mexico”) for the alleged arbitrary detention of the alleged victims, and for the lack of due process in the criminal proceedings against them. 2. The petitioner alleges that the State is responsible for violation of rights guaranteed in Articles 7 (the right to personal liberty), 8 (the right to a fair trial), 15 (the right of assembly), and 25 (the right to judicial protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “American Convention”). With respect to the requirement for prior exhaustion of domestic remedies, the petitioners argue that they were exhausted with the filing of at least four requests for constitutional protection (amparo) during the detention of the alleged victims and an appeal against the conviction. The State, for its part, alleges that this matter does not constitute a petition as defined in the Inter-American Commission’s Rules of Procedure, but a preliminary step. The State also says there is no issue for the case because the alleged victims were released in October 2008. It also alleges the lack of exhaustion of domestic remedies and the untimely filing of the petition. 3. Without prejudging the merits of the case, after examining the positions of the parties and pursuant to the requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention, the Commission decided to declare the case admissible in order to examine the alleged violation of the rights contained in Articles 5, 7, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with Articles 1.1 and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of the alleged victims. In addition, the Commission concluded that the petition is inadmissible with respect to Article 15 of the American Convention. The Commission also decided to notify the parties of this decision, to publish it, and to include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 4. On February 23, 2007, the IACHR received the petition and assigned it number 211-07. The petitioner presented additional information on February 28 and June 29, 2007, and on November 14, 2008. The IACHR forwarded the pertinent parts of these documents to the State on February 22, 2011, and asked it to submit its observations in accordance with the provisions of Article 30.3 of its Rules of Procedure. The State submitted its observations on June 2, 2011, which were duly transmitted to the petitioner. 5. In addition, the Commission received information from the petitioner on September 25, 2011, and May 15, 2013. The State submitted additional information on February 6 and 12, 2012, and on August 13, 2013. The notes sent by the parties were duly forwarded to the other party. 1 As provided in Article 17.2.a of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, Commissioner José de Jesús Orozco Henríquez, a Mexican citizen, did not participate in the discussion or decision of this case.

Seleccionar párrafo de destino3