Photo Credit: Flickr user kappazeta
Drug-related violence has dominated recent reporting on Mexico. However, in addition to the country’s struggle with organized crime networks, multiple governance issues continue to hamper political, social, and economic progress. Two areas of persistent deficits are minority issues, particularly indigenous rights, which are often violated despite Mexico’s formal recognition of its “multicultural” status; and a lack of democratic accountability at the state level.
A recent attack on humanitarian workers in Oaxaca state illustrates the severity of these problems. On April 27, gunmen attacked a convoy of 25 Mexican and European activists who were bringing food and supplies to the inhabitants of San Juan Copala, a self-defined autonomous indigenous community that has been under siege since January by a paramilitary group known as the Union for the Wellbeing of the Triqui Region (UBISORT). The militia has been tied to the state-level Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), the party that led Mexico unchallenged between 1929 and 2000 and continues to reign in Oaxaca under the leadership of Governor Ulises Ruiz. Of the 25 workers, two were shot and killed: Jyri Jaakkola, a Finnish human rights observer, and Beatriz Alberta Carino, the director of a local NGO. At least two others were injured, and six were missing. Four of the missing persons, including two missing journalists, surfaced on Thursday. A survivor reported that the attackers revealed themselves as members of UBISORT and claimed to act with the governor’s support. The identity and motive of the group, however, have not been verified, and the state government has denied involvement.
The incident focuses attention on the complicated situation in San Juan Copala, where a struggle pits indigenous movements against pro-government paramilitaries, powerful local political caciques, and the Ruiz-led state government, as well as each other. Violence in the area erupted following the formation of San Juan Copala in 2007 as an autonomous indigenous territory comprised of 5 municipalities dominated by the Independent Movement for Triqui Unity and Struggle (MULTI), along with 15 other Triqui municipalities sympathetic to the MULTI. The remaining 16 Triqui municipalities are predominantly controlled by the Movement for Triqui Unity and Struggle (MULT), a rival Triqui movement from which the MULTI split in 2006, and remained outside the autonomous territory. The Triqui autonomy movement seeks to secure political, social, and cultural rights long denied to locals by the Oaxaca state government. Indeed, the Triqui region is one of the most marginalized in what is already one of Mexico’s poorest states. The MULTI has allied itself with the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO), a radical association comprised of 300 local organizations that oppose the government due to the failure of local institutions and officials to promote development and social welfare, along with the government’s rampant corruption problem, its suppression of opposition voices, and its generally undemocratic structure. In Oaxaca, politics continues to be dominated by rivalries between local caciques who fight for state resources and control within the PRI. Other states’ governance is similarly tarnished, and the more poor and remote the territory, the weaker state presence—let alone effective institutions—is likely to be. These areas, however, are where the highest concentrations of indigenous Mexicans are often found, setting the stage for abuses against a broad range of political, social, economic, and cultural rights.
Since its formation, San Juan Copala has been subject to sieges and violent attacks by the UBISORT, which contests the autonomy of the municipality and the authority of its elected officials. The municipality’s existence as a legal entity has also been rejected by the government. State authorities have failed to address the longstanding conflict, which has allowed the situation to escalate and fueled the popular belief that the UBISORT is acting with either the tacit approval or the direct support of the government. At the end of last year, pro-government media outlets began to spread word that San Juan Copala had ceased to exist, an assertion the community’s authorities repeatedly disputed. Meanwhile, violence and tension increased at the end of last year, and a siege has left San Juan Copala’s inhabitants without basic services in recent months. Nineteen people have been killed since November 2009.
In the aftermath of the recent attack, the government has not yet evidenced a greater willingness to respond to the violence. The Washington Office on Latin America has reported that government authorities did not enter the area of the attack until the day after it occurred. In addition, state authorities initially denied knowledge of any disappearances following the attack and refused to organize a rescue. Instead, state authorities have faulted the humanitarian workers for bringing about the attacks by putting themselves in a dangerous situation and even implicated Gabino Cue Monteagudo, the opposition candidate for state governor, in the attack. Following the incident, Evencio Martinez, the Oaxaca state secretary of the interior, stated that “whoever organized this caravan will have to answer for it, whoever invited these people ... without taking precautions, because I think these people did not know what the situation and problems in the area were….They [the caravan members] will have to answer, too, for having accepted the invitation." In turn, Governor Ruiz remarked that “they are people who work with the opposition candidate, the opposition candidate has shown that he supports the APPO, that he supports violence, that he supports these type of situations that, instead of making proposals to transform the state…”
This is not the first time human rights issues have engulfed Ruiz’s administration. As Amnesty International states, “Oaxaca authorities have for many years been unwilling to investigate grave human rights violations in that State.” For example, at least 20 people were killed by state police and an armed pro-government group during a series of anti-government demonstrations organized by the APPO in the second half of 2006 that sought to force Governor Ruiz to resign. Among those killed was American journalist Brad Will. The state’s negligence in the investigation of Will’s murder is illustrative. While evidence implicated a group of pro-government gunmen in the murder, the state failed to fully investigate the men, instead imprisoning Juan Manuel Martinez, an APPO activist who was eventually exonerated in February 2010. Human rights groups have alleged that the armed men were never charged due to ties between the group and Governor Ruiz.
Importantly, the federal government has also failed to fully investigate the 2006 violence and hold the Ruiz government accountable for human rights violations. In February 2008, the attorney general announced that it would shelve investigations into the cases of seven victims of the protest violence due to a lack of evidence. Later that year, the attorney general also rejected the National Human Rights Commission’s judgment that the Oaxaca state investigation into Brad Will’s murder was shoddy. In January 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that Governor Ruiz was responsible for violating individual human rights guarantees during the 2006 violence. However, the decision failed to set out any punishment and lacked coercive power due to a constitutional provision that limits the court’s power to investigating and identifying public officials who violate the rights of Mexican citizens rather than determining sanctions, a task that is reserved for executive and legislative authorities at the federal and state levels. Such authorities have failed to act on the ruling, empowering Ruiz to act with impunity. The Oaxaca case thus highlights the federal government’s failure to hold state authorities accountable for their abuses.
The situation in Oaxaca points to several problems restraining Mexico’s democratic advancement. Although Mexico has made gains toward promoting party pluralism and electoral accountability at the federal level, similar progress has not been achieved in the states. In at least 13 of Mexico’s 31 states, the PRI has yet to suffer gubernatorial defeat. States such as Oaxaca essentially remain fiefdoms, with little democratic accountability, making attempts to promote good governance at the subnational level exceedingly difficult. The federal government ostensibly has power to rein in rogue governors, but has failed to challenge local power holders in a number of places, Oaxaca among them. In a positive recent development, the Mexican Senate recently passed a human rights law that would enshrine protections upheld by the American Convention on Human Rights into the Mexican constitution and limit the use of force by security forces in operations against organized crime. However, the Oaxaca government’s response to the human rights in San Juan Copala, which has been tainted by denial and indifference, underscores the fact that any attempt to advance comprehensive human rights reform in the country will be seriously hindered unless a culture of greater accountability is fostered at all government levels.