Mexico

2015
Rodriguez P. Abuse and Denial of Sexual and Reproductive Rights of women with psychosocial disabilities in Mexico. Disability Rights International; 2015. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.driadvocacy.org/media-gallery/our-reports-publications/

Please see third publication, under "Twice Violated".

In Mexico there is very little information available on the situation of sexual and reproductive rights of women with psychosocial disabilities. This is in direct contravention of Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter ‘CRPD’ or ‘Convention’), according to which, “States Parties undertake to collect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to enable them to formulate and implement policies to give effect to the Convention.2 is the first of its kind. Its main purpose is to lay the foundation for further advocacy efforts to guarantee the sexual and reproductive rights of women with disabilities at the legislative and policy level in Mexico. In this regard, it should be noted that in September 2014, Mexico was evaluated by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD Committee) for the first time. The preliminary results of this research were presented before the CRPD Committee and were included in the Committee’s Concluding Observations and recommendations to the Mexican State. This research and the recommendations by the CRPD Committee will prove to be a valuable tool for further advocacy on this relevant but long ignored issue.

The present report is based on the results of a year-long study carried out by Disability Rights International (DRI) together with the Women’s Group of the Colectivo Chuhcan –the first organization in Mexico directed by persons with psychosocial disabilities. This research included the application of a questionnaire to fifty-one women with psychosocial disabilities who were either members of the Colectivo Chuhcan or received outpatient services at four different health clinics and psychiatric institutions in Mexico City. We recommend this research be extended to the rest of the country to gain a clearer picture on the situation of the sexual and reproductive rights of women with disabilities at a national level.

 

2013
Violence Against Women Human Rights Defenders: Summary Findings 2012. JASS - Just Associates; 2013 pp. 39. Publisher's VersionAbstract

https://www.justassociates.org/en/resources/violence-against-women-human...

Thousands of Women Human Rights Defenders (WHRDs) are currently at risk in Mexico and Central America. To address the widespread violence, the Mesoamerican Women Human Rights Defenders Initiative (IM–Defensoras) was formed in 2010 with and for frontline women activists who are facing threats, intimidation, and attacks for defending justice and human rights.

IM–Defensoras currently works with over 300 women defending rights and their organizations to provide activists with the resources and support needed to address security concerns and strengthen and sustain their activism over the long-term.

The network is a key source for data and analysis on violence against WHRDs from a gender perspective, and can rapidly mobilize network members and influential allies for strategic engagement with governments and international human rights organizations. 

Moser PT. The Duty to Ensure Human Rights and its Evolution in the Inter-American System: Comparing Maria da Penha v. Brazil With Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v. United States. Journal of Gender, Social Policy & The Law [Internet]. 2013;21 (2) :437-453. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ajgsp21&div=20&id=&page=

*This full article is available through this link. This article may be available free of charge to those with university credentials.

First, this Article explains the facts and the Commission's legal analysis in Maria da Penha and Lenahan and briefly describes the different approach taken by the Commission in each case.

Second, this Article analyzes the evolution in the case law that led to the recognition that a State's failure to prevent and investigate could constitute a violation of substantive rights. Third, this Article examines the standard the Commission utilized in analyzing the duty to prevent in Lenahan and describes the theory of foreseeable risk, how it has been used, and the role it played in the Lenahan case. Finally, this Article discusses the theory of foreseeable risk, its application to cases of domestic violence, and the significance of this development in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American system.

This Article concludes that the recognition of substantive rights may be violated by the failure of the State to prevent and investigate, and that the use of the theory of foreseeable risk constitutes a significant step forward in clarifying the obligation of States to fight domestic violence. Finding a State responsible for failing to prevent, pursuant to the theory of foreseeable risk, implies that the State knew or ought to have known there was an imminent risk of domestic violence, and in the face of this foreseeable risk, the State failed to take action. This lack of prevention might be considered the equivalent of acquiescence pursuant to the definition of torture in the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT)." Consequently, this evolution could, and hopefully will, result in a recognition in the Inter-American System that in certain circumstances domestic violence constitutes torture.

2012
Acharya AK. Tráfico de mujeres en México: El caso del estado de Nuevo León. Marco legal para combatirlo. Espacio Abierto [Internet]. 2012;21 (4) :629-652. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=12224818002

Resumen

El tráfico de mujeres no sólo es una violencia contra las mujeres, sino también es una violación contra los derechos humanos. Aunque es sabida la extensión de esta clase de violencia, la respuesta de la gran mayoría de los gobiernos en todo el mundo es negativa o poco eficiente, como es el caso del gobierno nacional y los estatales de México. Muchas organizaciones internacionales entre ellas las Naciones Unidas, han recomendado a México diversos tipos de acciones y legislaciones, pero la respuesta del gobierno nacional y estatal ha sido deficiente. Por eso, el objetivo principal de esta investigación es examinar y documentar los instrumentos internacionales, nacionales (México) y estatales (Nuevo León) en lo referente al tráfico de mujeres. En ese sentido, la presente investigación está dividida en tres partes. En la primera, el artículo examina los instrumentos internacionales, en la segunda se describen los instrumentos nacionales adaptados para combatir el tráfico de mujeres en México, y en la tercera, se analizan las medidas adaptadas por parte del gobierno de Nuevo León para combatir este problema en el estado. 
Palabras Claves: tráfico de mujeres, convenciones internacionales, nacionales e estatales, méxico, Nuevo León.

 

Informe para la ONU sobre la violencia contra las mujeres y los feminicidios en Chihuahua. Mukira; 2012. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://mukira.org/publicaciones/

El cuarto documento en este página

Este informe contiene estadísticas oficiales sobre el número de homicidios de mujeres en el estado de Chihuahua en los últimos 20 años, y casos paradigmáticos de violencia de género. El documento fue elaborado por Justicia para Nuestras Hijas, el Centro de Derechos Humanos de las Mujeres (CEDEHM) y Mukira, y presentado en el verano de 2012 ante el Comité para la Eliminación de Todas las Formas de Discriminación (CEDAW) de la ONU.

2009
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico. Organization of American States; 2009. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/women/decisions/ia_court_hr.asp

  • Pages 47-61, Facts
  • Pages 145-150, Summary of Decision
  • Pages 152-161, Concurring Opinions

1. On November 4, 2007, under Articles 51 and 61 of the Convention, the Inter- American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter- American Commission”) presented an application against the United Mexican States (hereinafter “the State” or “Mexico”), which gave rise to the instant case. The initial petition was presented to the Commission on March 6, 2002. On February 24, 2005, the Commission approved Reports Nos. 16/05, 17/05 and 18/05, declaring the respective petitions admissible. On January 30, 2007, the Commission notified the parties of its decision to joinder the three cases. Subsequently, on March 9, 2007, it approved the Report on merits No. 28/07, in accordance with Article 50 of the Convention, with specific recommendations for the State. This report was notified to the State on April 4, 2007. Upon considering that Mexico had not adopted its recommendations, the Commission decided to submit the case to the jurisdiction of the Court. The Commission appointed Commissioner Florentín Meléndez and Executive Secretary Santiago A. Canton, as delegates, and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Deputy Executive Secretary, and Juan Pablo Albán, Marisol Blanchard, Rosa Celorio and Fiorella Melzi, Executive Secretariat specialists, as legal advisers.

2. The application relates to the State’s alleged international responsibility for “the disappearance and subsequent death” of the Mss. Claudia Ivette González, Esmeralda Herrera Monreal and Laura Berenice Ramos Monárrez (hereinafter “Mss. González, Herrera and Ramos”), whose bodies were found in a cotton field in Ciudad Juárez on November 6, 2001. The State is considered responsible for “the lack of measures for the protection of the victims, two of whom were minor children, the lack of prevention of these crimes, in spite of full awareness of the existence of a pattern of gender- related violence that had resulted in hundreds of women and girls murdered, the lack of response of the authorities to the disappearance [...]; the lack of due diligence in the investigation of the homicides [...], as well as the denial of justice and the lack of an adequate reparation.” 

Inter-American Court of Human Rights Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico.; 2009. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/women/decisions/ia_court_hr.asp

In its 2009 judgment in the Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico, the Court held Mexico to be responsible for human rights violations based on the handling of investigations into disappearances and deaths of women and girls in Ciudad Juárez. The state's actions, the court opined, contributed to the atmosphere of impunity surrounding the maltreatment of women in the city.

2008
Encuesta de salud y derechos de las mujeres indigenas - ENSADEMI. México : Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública - México; 2008 pp. 124. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.insp.mx/produccion-editorial/publicaciones-anteriores-2010/65...

La ENSADEMI intenta por primera vez evaluar las condiciones de salud y violencia doméstica de las mujeres indígenas de México. Para ello se realizó una cuidada encuesta dirigida a las mujeres usuarias de los servicios de salud en comunidades rurales de seis estados.

2007
Beltrán A, Freeman L. Hidden in Plain Sight: Violence Against Women in Mexico and Guatemala. WOLA - Advocacy for Human Rights in the Americas; 2007. Publisher's VersionAbstract

http://www.wola.org/publications/hidden_in_plain_sight_violence_against_...

This publication addresses the problem of violence against women in Mexico and Guatemala by carefully analyzes the roots and effects of the violence and offering concrete proposals for positive change.

The report looks at the role the Mexican and Guatemalan public security and judicial institutions have played with respect to violence against women. A criminal justice approach alone will not eradicate the problem, but the criminal justice sector has an obligation to ensure respect for women’s rights and protection under the law.

The gap between the law and its implementation is disturbingly wide, creating numerous barriers to justice for women victims of violence. Authorities fail to adequately and promptly investigate cases and punish and prosecute those responsible.  They tend to blame the victims and fail to see gender-based violence as a serious crime. In some cases, anachronistic laws remain on the books. The issue’s low priority is reflected in the lack of resources, equipment, and training within police and judicial institutions.