Three months following the last military advance into the Lacandon Jungle (see SIPAZ Report, Vol. IV, No. 3), the Mexican Army increased its presence once again in that region in August. The most important events took place in Amador Hernandez, county of Ocosingo. Approximately 500 Army troops arrived via land and parachute in this community, which is 19 kilometers from where the Zapatista command is supposedly located. At the same time, students and professors from the School of Anthropology and History and from the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) were participating in a national meeting in defense of the cultural heritage convened by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) in the nearby community of La Realidad. Upon learning of the incursion, some of them went there in order to observe the situation.

State authorities reacted by threatening to issue arrest warrants against the students for the crimes of inciting violence, obstruction of roads, kidnapping, and attacking the Army. They also carried out a fierce campaign of disparagement and defamation against them, utilizing a broad array of regional and national mass media, accusing them, among other things, of “manipulating” the indigenous. Chiapas Governor Roberto Albores Guillen, warned that he would no longer accept the presence of national and international observers, and acts of “destabilization” would no longer be allowed. In a subsequent state government communiqué, he added that “we in Chiapas are losing patience…Enough of blackmail and manipulation…[by]…agitators [who] are taking advantage of the political conflicts and are polluting the state.”

Government and military sources argued that the military presence in Amador Hernandez sought to protect the topographers who were taking measurements for the stretch of highway from San Quintin (where one of the most important military barracks in the state is found) to Amador Hernandez and onward. This community, however, does not want that highway, since it will facilitate the Army’s entrance into the region.

At the same time, some 6000 military troops moved into the Lacandon Jungle in order to carry out a reforestation program, allowing them to establish new camps, checkpoints and other military works in the conflict zone.

Government officials, under national and international pressure, later softened their statements, and the Interior Ministry attempted to pacify the situation. However, military forces remain in Amador Hernandez.

On August 26, there was a confrontation between the Army and Zapatista supporters in the community of San Jose La Esperanza (county of Las Margaritas). Three indigenous were arbitrarily detained. The Ministry of National Defense announced that seven members of the Army were wounded by machete blows.

In Morelia (county of Altamirano) and in Roberto Barrios (county of Palenque) – two Zapatista Aguascalientes – tension has risen to worrisome levels. In Morelia, today a divided community, the PRI supporters took six Zapatista sympathizers prisoners, destroyed houses and dislocated the Civil Peace Camp there.

In July, the state Congress, dominated by the PRI, approved the creation of seven new counties, as well as the proposal for a state law on Indigenous Rights and Culture. The governor stated, “If peace is truly desired in Chiapas, there are no longer any excuses, because, with this law, liberty and respect for ethnic autonomy are guaranteed, and so the dispute between the EZLN and the federal government no longer has any substantive basis.” The political opposition and numerous local social organizations strongly criticized these proposals, arguing that neither their content, nor their unilateral nature, would help to facilitate the peace process.

New Peace Proposal

On September 7, the federal government released a new proposal for dialogue in Chiapas. The Interior Minister, Diodoro Carrasco Altamirano, stated that he would be willing to head a negotiating commission, anytime and any place (see the Open Letter). The proposal was well received in many political and social quarters, some of whom suggested some improvements. Among the points of contention are: the repositioning of the Army, the issue of the alleged paramilitary groups (investigation and punishment), and the fact that the government continues to promote its Indigenous Rights and Culture proposal instead of implementing the 1996 legislative proposal of the congressional Commission for Agreement and Pacification (COCOPA), already accepted by the EZLN. Regarding the strong military presence in Chiapas, Carrasco stated that the issue of its repositioning would be dealt with when negotiations with the EZLN resumed. He also reported that 37 accused Zapatistas had been released, in order to demonstrate the government’s good will.

Concerning the prisoners, representatives of the Mexican Bishops Conference (CEM), during their visit to Chiapas (August 11-13) and following a visit to the Cerro Hueco Jail, stated that several prisoners had apparently been unjustly incarcerated. EZLN Subcommander Marcos stated that the EZLN was not going to respond quickly to the Open Letter, as long as the government “was adding statements, corrections and postscripts to it.”

Two weeks later, Jorge Madrazo Cuellar, the Attorney General of the Republic, stated that “a true culture of legality does not exist in this country,” and that impunity of government officials was a consequence of the fact that there was a lack of respect for the law. While avoiding stating that they carried weapons, he recognized the existence of armed groups (15 in total) in Chiapas, saying that “it is highly probable” that they were “a consequence of religious conflicts, and in order to defend their property and interests.”

International Visits and Commentaries

At the end of her visit to Mexico (July 23), the United Nations’ Special Rapporteur for Extrajudicial Executions, Asma Jahangir, expressed her concern for the impunity of those responsible for massacres and executions. She also expressed her concern that such violent acts may be repeated, despite the government’s desire and the measures taken to improve the situation: “Injustice owing to selective impunity is a political question in Mexico…It is the result of politics and a legal system that fails. It would appear that policies are changing in favor of justice, but the legal system changes at a slower pace than does the political will of those in the government who want to see the promotion of the rule of law.” From the time the Rapporteur arrived, strong criticisms were heard from the Ministry of Foreign Relations, from the Coordinator for Dialogue (Emilio Rabasa) and from the National Human Rights Commission, accusing the Rapporteur of involving herself in affairs that did not correspond to her mandate and violating Mexican sovereignty. The concerns regarding partial, but not definitive, progress in the legal system were shared by Joel Solomon, Director of Investigations for Human Rights Watch, during his stay in Mexico.

In addition, the UN Human Rights Committee, upon examining in July the fourth report on Mexico, insisted once again that the issues of Chiapas, the administration of justice, violence against women, the growing militarization and impunity are all still a cause for “worry” and “profound concern.” The Committee stated that the official delegation had not convinced the examiners, adding that the willingness to respond and the ample documentation offered by Mexico had not managed to dispel doubts nor instill confidence. The Committee recognized improvements, such as: the autonomy granted to the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH); the establishment of several programs for women and children; the program on the presumed disappeared; the release of some detained indigenous; the promulgation of the Law for Federal Public Defense and of the law for preventing and punishing torture, as well as some electoral reforms.

The Mexican government has kept up its tough talk on national sovereignty regarding human rights matters, resulting in the expulsion of 144 foreigners from Chiapas in 1998, expulsions that are continuing up to the present time. They have also continued to minimize the importance of reports by international human rights bodies. Nonetheless, it was announced at the end of August that Mexico was reviewing the process for its entrance into the Council of Europe, which includes human rights in its purview, as an extra-regional observer country. Mexico would be the fourth country with this special status (the others being the United States, Canada and Japan).

For his part, during his visit to Chiapas, the ambassador from the European Union to Mexico, Manuel Lopez Blanco, stated that human rights violations in Chiapas and in other parts of the country would not prevent the completion of a trade agreement with Mexico.

In contrast, Mexican non-governmental organizations presented an alternative report on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (DESC) arguing that neoliberal economic policies have been a determining factor in the worsening of poverty and social injustices. Every five years the Mexican government prepares a report for the UN on the fulfillment of its obligations in this arena.

… … … … … …

Update: Acteal

On July 20, a state judge sentenced 20 accused members of the group that assassinated 45 indigenous in Acteal to 35 years in prison. In the second week of September, 25 persons implicated in the massacre were also sentenced to from 32 to 35 years for the crimes of homicide, assault, and the carrying of firearms restricted to the use of the Army. Among those sentenced (all indigenous) was the former county president of Chenalho. Those who have been sentenced thus far have been convicted as individuals, not as members of an armed group, which would have increased their sentences.

These sentences bring to 55 the number of persons convicted, and legal processes are yet to be completed for another 47 persons implicated in the case. There are also 90 outstanding arrest warrants, eleven of them for former state government officials and state police.

It remains to be seen how far the investigation will pursue the intellectual authors of the massacre, who could include high government officials.

… … … … … …

The Government’s Open Letter

The new government proposal for dialogue contains the following six points:

1. It proposes that the Senate of the Republic take up again the issue of constitutional changes on indigenous rights and culture, and that it accept proposals from the EZLN, from the government itself and from other groups involved in the conflict.
2. It asks the EZLN to propose dates for the government to carry out what was agreed to at San Andres on social development in the indigenous communities of Chiapas.
3. It calls on judicial bodies for the release of EZLN members or sympathizers who have not been implicated in murders or rapes.
4. It commits itself to analyzing the denunciations of human rights organizations on the harassment being experienced by indigenous communities in Chiapas.
5. It agrees to create a new civil and nonpartisan mediation body.
6. It commits itself to sending a government negotiating commission with decision making capabilities.