Claudia Medina v. Secretaría de Marina and Fiscalia General de la República
Systematic Torture and Sexual Violence Committed by the Armed Forces with the Assent of the Prosecutor’s Office
In 2006, in the context of the so-called “war on drugs” against organized crime, the Mexican government granted powers to carry out law enforcement operations to the armed forces. Since then, Mexico has become rife with allegations of human rights violations perpetrated by members of the Mexican armed forces against innocent civilians. The all-powerful Mexican Navy (SEMAR) is particularly notorious for what the National Human Rights Commission has referred to as a “recurrent practice” of torturing detainees when in custody. The SEMAR is also infamous for the rampant impunity it enjoys. Reportedly, women were raped in 80% of detentions that it carried out. Far from discharging its constitutional obligation to protect human rights, the prosecutor’s office (Fiscalía General de la República) has compounded the serious human rights crisis that plagues the country and rubber-stamped the SEMAR’s grave human rights violations.
In 2012, the SEMAR unlawfully arrested, tortured, and raped Claudia Medina, seeking a confession for a crime that she did not commit. The prosecutor’s office effectively rubber-stamped the Mexican Navy’s human rights violations and subsequently launched a series of spurious criminal investigations against Medina based on evidence fabricated against her. She spent 23 days in prison and was forced to flee in fear for her life. Her innocence prevailed; yet, despite medical reports showing torture and rape, and evidence of the navy’s systematic use of torture to secure confessions, the prosecution service dismissed Medina’s claims and failed to conduct a prompt and effective investigation. After four years of waiting for redress without response, Centro Prodh, the Mexican NGO that defended Medina in the criminal proceedings, and Open Society Justice Initiative filed administrative claims seeking reparations against both the navy and the prosecutor’s office.
Medina's case illustrates the systematic pattern of torture and sexual violence against women committed by the armed forces with the approval of the prosecutor's office. This is the first time the state financial liability remedy is used in Mexico to obtain reparations for torture and is aimed at providing victims with some sense of justice while ensuring the adoption of guarantees of non-repetition aimed at structural changes in order to ensure that fundamental legal safeguards are guaranteed in practice to all persons held in custody. At the same time, resorting to this legal avenue to seek reparations against Mexican institutions and state agencies responsible for serious human rights violations sounds the alarm on the state of failures in the system and publicizes irregularities. Moreover, the financial burden of any ruling could deter the state from committing further violations. Legal outcomes may also pave the way for future claims.
Facts
On August 7, 2012, balaclava-wearing Mexican Navy personnel dragged Medina and her husband from their house in Veracruz, Mexico, in the middle of the night, without any legitimate reason. Over the course of 36 hours, navy personnel covertly held Medina incommunicado in a navy base and repeatedly attempted to coerce a confession from her by way of intimidation, torture, and sexual violence. Navy personnel repeatedly electrocuted, strangled, asphyxiated, violently battered, and raped Medina, and threatened her with further mistreatment. She agreed to a forced confession after they threatened her children and signed a testimony that she never read. The navy neither informed her of the reasons for her arrest nor registered her detention.
Nearly two days after the beginning of her ordeal, and after threatening Medina to ensure her silence about the treatment she had suffered, the navy took Medina to the prosecutor’s office, where they paraded her before the media alongside other individuals as a member of the drug cartel “Jalisco Nueva Generación”.
Sleep deprived, battered, and without medical and legal assistance, the prosecutor’s office forced Medina to stand for several hours before taking her testimony. The prosecutor insulted her, denied her right to make a call and to adequate and effective legal assistance, and prevented Medina from reading her statement before signing it. The prosecutor allowed a marine to be present throughout the entire statement and did nothing to stop the marine’s continuous threats against her.
Immediately after her release, and without any evidence, the prosecutor subjected Medina to successive spurious criminal investigations and several arrest warrants, which forced her to leave her home state, Veracruz. It was not until 2015 that a tribunal ruled that all charges against Medina were unfounded and that she had been unlawfully detained, tortured, and raped by the Mexican Navy. To this day, the prosecutor has not charged anyone, and Medina remains forcibly displaced.
In 2016, Centro Prodh and the Open Society Justice Initiative filed two separate administrative claims for reparations against the prosecutor’s office and the Mexican Navy on Medina’s behalf under the State Financial Liability Federal Act, which entitles those who unlawfully sustain harm or infringement of their rights due to the State’s irregular administrative activities to redress.
Open Society Justice Initiative Involvement
The Open Society Justice Initiative is acting as co-counsel, together with Centro Prodh, in judicial proceedings against the prosecutor’s office and the Mexican Navy.
Arguments
The treatment Medina was subjected to violated a series of human rights protected under, amongst others, the Mexican Constitution, the American Convention of Human Rights, the UN Convention against Torture, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
This national and international legislation defines the content and scope of “irregular administrative activities”, set by the State Federal Liability Act as the range of activities against which compensation and other reparations can be claimed.
The Mexican Navy unlawfully and arbitrarily arrested Medina. She was also kept incommunicado in a secret, unmonitored place of detention, without being offered prompt and confidential access to a legal representative.
The Mexican Navy tortured Medina. The violent treatment inflicted on Medina by the Mexican Navy during detention was compounded by the failure of the Mexican Navy to provide medical treatment in the immediate aftermath of the unlawful acts.
The prosecutor’s office violated Medina’s due process and fair trial rights. The prosecutor’s office portrayed Medina as a guilty individual to the media, violating her right to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Similarly, the prosecutor’s office denied her right to adequate medical and legal assistance, to make a call, and enabled the intimidation of Medina by allowing a Mexican Navy member to threaten her while she was providing testimony.
The prosecutor’s office failed to guarantee Medina’s right to effective recourse and access to justice. Despite medical reports submitted by Medina to the relevant authorities attesting to the torture she was subjected to, the prosecutor’s office failed to launch an effective and prompt investigation into the events, therefore rubber-stamping and legitimizing earlier rights violations perpetrated by the Mexican Navy.
In Procedings v. Mexican Navy: The Superior Chamber of the Federal Tribunal found that Claudia Medina was victim of serious human rights violations, including cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and sexual violence. The judgment ordered the Navy to provide Medina with comprehensive reparations, including compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, and guarantees of non-repetition.
The decision concluded that the Navy’s actions stem from historical, social, and cultural differences between men and women that are based on violence, subordination, and discrimination and found that the violation of Medina´s right to access to justice amounts to continued institutional violence.
The decision confirms that victims have the right to reparations independently of the result of criminal investigations, and clearly establishes that victims can trigger multiple reparations procedures to seek redress.
On 17 October, 2023, in response to the Navy's constitutional challenge against the decision, the Federal Tribunal confirmed the merits of the case and, in addition to the reparations already granted, ordered the Navy to issue a public apology to Medina.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: The Collegiate Circuit Tribunal granted amparo protection to Medina and found that her right to access to justice was breached due to the lack of a decision on the merits, particularly from a gender perspective. It set aside the 8 of December 2021 judgment and instructed the Federal Court to issue a new decision on the merits from a gender perspective.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The Federal Administrative Tribunal allows the lawsuit to proceed.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: The Collegiate Circuit Tribunal (Tribunal Colegiado de Circuito ) allows the amparo to proceed.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: A lawsuit is filed against the March 2022 decision of the prosecutor’s office to dismiss the claim. The lawsuit adds the lack of an effective investigation to the large number of violations committed by the prosecutor’s office, includes international standards on prosecutorial accountability applicable to prosecutors regardless of the legal system they operate in, and requests a decision on the merits.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: A request is submitted for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) against the Federal Administrative Court's decision.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The prosecutor’s office dismisses the claim without addressing most of the serious violations directly committed by the office. Regarding the rest, the prosecutor’s office argues that the acts that constitute the basis of Medina's claim are either not attributable to it or cannot constitute the basis for a financial liability claim.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: The Federal Administrative Tribunal dismisses proceedings without deciding on the merits, under the mistaken understanding that there was no administrative decision to challenge because the proceedings were still in the evidence phase and, therefore, the “administrative silence” (the elapse of statutory time without a government answer) did not operate.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The Supreme Court dismisses the amparo against the July 5, 2021, judgment.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: A request for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) is filed before the Supreme Court against the July 5, 2021, decision.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The Federal Administrative Tribunal, implementing Collegiate Circuit Tribunal’s judgement, declares the Prosecutor’s February 26, 2019, decision void and instructs it to issue new decision on the merits.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: A request is submitted for the tribunal to issue a decision given the delay in proceedings.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: On July 5, a Collegiate Circuit Tribunal’s three-judge panel grants the request for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) against the January 7, 2020, ruling and sends the case back to the lower court, the Federal Administrative Tribunal, to issue a decision. It reiterates that Medina's action is not barred by the statute of limitations and that the prosecutor’s office must adjudicate on the merits.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: A Collegiate Circuit Tribunal (Tribunal Colegiado de Circuito) allows the amparo to proceed.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: An application is filed for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) against the Federal Administrative Court's January 7 ruling. The amparo challenges the decision’s severe failure to address the serious violations directly committed by the prosecutor. Despite granting full evidentiary value to the medical evidence submitted by Medina, the judgment either plainly omitted reference to the several well-documented violations committed directly by the prosecutor against Medina or dramatically failed to address them properly.
The prosecutor’s office also appeals the Federal Administrative Court's January 7 decision, challenging its assessment that the February 26 decision of the prosecutor's office was void because the limitation period had not elapsed.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The Federal Administrative Court declares the prosecutor's February 26 decision void because the limitation period had not elapsed, but dismisses Medina’s lawsuit. After admitting the existence of evidence of the harm inflicted on Medina and assuming that the Prosecutor’s office may have acted wrongfully, the judgement argues that the navy, and not the prosecutor’s office, should be responsible for providing the reparations in this case.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: The navy responds to the claim for reparations denying all responsibility.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The prosecutor’s office files a brief denying all responsibility.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: After several appeals and requests for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo), the Federal Tribunal of Administrative Justice formally admits the lawsuit against the navy's failure to respond to the reparations claim (negativa ficta) and refers the case to the superior chamber on the grounds of importance and transcendence.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: A lawsuit against the dismissal is filed with the Federal Administrative Tribunal.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The prosecutor’s office dismisses the claim and denies reparations arguing that action is barred by the statute of limitations and attributing responsibility for the violations and any wrongful prosecution to the navy and judiciary.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: The prosecutor’s office resumes proceedings.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: After several appeals, the Tribunal Colegiado de Circuito granted the amparo and instructed the prosecutor’s office to continue the administrative proceedings.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: After several appeals, the Collegiate Circuit Tribunal (Tribunal Colegiado de Circuito) grants the amparo, declares the victims’ rights to reparations independently of the existence of criminal proceedings, and instructs the Prosecutor’s Office to continue the administrative proceedings.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: A lawsuit against the navy’s failure to respond to the reparations claim (negative ficta) is filed with the Federal Tribunal of Administrative Justice.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: An application is filed for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) against the suspension of proceedings filed with the Federal Justice system.
Proceedings against prosecutor's office: The prosecutor’s office suspends the administrative proceedings based on the existence of an ongoing criminal investigation against the navy’s personnel.
The National Human Rights Commission issues a recommendation outlining the extent of the human rights violations suffered by Medina at the hands of the Mexican Navy.
Proceedings against the prosecutor's office: A claim for compensation and other reparations is filed with the prosecutor’s office.
Proceedings against the Mexican Navy: A claim for compensation and other reparations is filed with the Mexican Navy.
An appeal tribunal finds that the Mexican Navy unlawfully detained, tortured, and raped Medina. The ruling conclusively establishes that there is no evidence of the crimes that Medina was accused of, and that the report authored by the navy in this regard is untruthful.
A district court overturns the only subsisting arrest warrant against Medina, declaring it unconstitutional.
The prosecutor’s office issues several warrants against Medina in relation to multiple charges.
The prosecutor’s office charges Medina with several offenses, including organized crime.
Thirty-six hours after her abduction, the navy takes Medina to the prosecutor’s office, where they parade her in front of the media as a member of the cartel “Jalisco Nueva Generación”. She provides testimony before the prosecutor under duress in the presence of navy personnel.
The Mexican Navy unlawfully arrests Medina and takes her from her home to a naval air base where navy personnel keep her incommunicado and torture and sexually abuse her to secure a confession for a crime she did not commit.
