The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of Mexico, with Committee Experts commending the State on implementing their previous recommendations, and asking about the implications of environmental projects, including the Mayan train project, on indigenous populations, and about the treatment of Haitian migrants.
Faith Dikeledi Pansy Tlakula, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said the Committee noted with appreciation the measures taken to implement the recommendations it had made in its previous concluding observations on access to justice, including the accreditation of public defenders who could speak indigenous languages, the appointment of translators who could speak indigenous languages, training provided by the Federal Judicial Training School on issues of discrimination, and specialised indigenous courts, amongst others
In the period of 2019-2021, the federal and state governments in Mexico had initiated mega-projects throughout the country affecting the territories of indigenous peoples. The Mayan train project had been presented as a windfall for the local economy, job availability, and regional and national development. However, the project had created controversy and contravened against international law, specifically in relation to the matter of free, prior, and informed consent from the indigenous communities impacted by the project. Could detailed information be provided?
A Committee Expert asked how Mexico was dealing with Haitian migrants? The Committee was concerned about Haiti and the impact of the situation on the region. Chinsung Chung, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said civil society organizations had documented information on cases of assaults, arbitrary detentions, torture, mass deportations, and discriminatory practices that undermined Haitian asylum seekers’ human rights and their access to international protection in various countries in the region, including Mexico. What measures had been taken to prevent racial discrimination against migrants of Haitian origin?
The delegation said consultations in Mexico had constitutional standing, and were recognised specifically when it came to development. Regarding the Mayan train project, 15 regional assemblies had been organised, where the information on the project was provided, including its impact on life and the environment. The regional assemblies had unanimously approved the Mayan train project. The minutes of all of these assemblies were available, detailing where agreements had been reached between the Government of Mexico and the authorities of indigenous communities.
The delegation said since 2019, Haitians were among the five major nationalities to receive resident permits on humanitarian grounds in Mexico. In 2019, there were 858 permits issued to Haitians. In 2023, there were 36,000 permits issued, which attested to an increasing trend. Mexico was engaging in cooperative activities with Haiti and other neighbours. It was important to look at the structural causes of migration and the need to invest more in the communities of origin.
Introducing the report, Claudia Morales Reza, President of the National Council for the Prevention of Discrimination of Mexico, said Mexico was a country with 130 million inhabitants, 32 federal entities, and over 2,400 municipalities. It had social and cultural diversity, including 425 indigenous populations and Mexicans of African descent. The indigenous peoples were the first inhabitants of Mexico, and their history was more than 4,000 years old. Currently, more than 23 million people in Mexico considered themselves to be indigenous, representing 18 per cent of the population.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Tlakula thanked members of the delegation of Mexico for their constructive and open manner during the dialogue. The Committee commended Mexico for bringing their reporting obligations up to date. Next time when there were vacancies in the Committee, attempts should be made to nominate people from Mexico to serve on the Committee.
Francisca Elizabeth Méndez Escobar, Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, said Mexico had come to the meeting with a small but substantive delegation and participated in the dialogue with the Committee. While progress had been made, there were still sustained challenges which needed to be addressed. The delegation thanked the Committee for the constructive dialogue.
The delegation of Mexico consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; the National Council for the Prevention of Discrimination; the National Institute of Indigenous Peoples; the Council of the Federal Judiciary; and the Permanent Mission of Mexico to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s one hundred and twelfth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Thursday, 11 April, at 3 p.m. to consider the initial report of San Marino (CERD/C/SMR/QPR/1).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of Mexico (CERD/C/MEX/22-24).
Presentation of Report
FRANCISCA ELIZABETH MÉNDEZ ESCOBAR, Permanent Representative of Mexico to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, acknowledged the work of the Committee over the years, which had guided Mexico in implementing public polices and legislation. Mexico had an ambitious public policy to combat poverty, which also focused on indigenous persons. The State worked to preserve the cultural heritage of indigenous peoples, which was an intrinsic component of Mexican culture.
CLAUDIA MORALES REZA, President of the National Council for the Prevention of Discrimination of Mexico, said Mexico had a robust legal framework for combatting discrimination. The Constitution prohibited discrimination in all forms. The National Programme of Human Rights 2020-2024 placed particular emphasis on economic, cultural and social rights. The Government’s anti-discrimination policy aimed to ensure the inclusion of all persons equally, with full respect for their diversity. Mexico was a country with 130 million inhabitants, 32 federal entities, and over 2,400 municipalities. It had social and cultural diversity, including 425 indigenous populations and Mexicans of African descent. The indigenous peoples were the first inhabitants of Mexico, and their history was more than 4,000 years old. Currently, more than 23 million people in Mexico considered themselves to be indigenous, representing 18 per cent of the population.
Disaggregated data allowed for the design of public policies. The national survey of 2022 emphasised that being a woman was still a major cause of discrimination, particularly for Mexican women of African descent. The Government had taken steps to make a reduction of 5.1 million people living in multi-dimensional poverty. From 2019 to 2024, the minimum wage had increased by 120 per cent, benefitting more than 8 million people. The unemployment rate in Mexico was under three per cent, which was the lowest level since 2006. Although Mexico had made significant progress, there were still pending issues to tackle, and these would be addressed throughout the dialogue.
Questions by Committee Experts
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, thanked the Mexican delegation for the pledge made during the anniversary of the United Nations Declaration for Human Rights, in relation to the Convention. Did the State party include racial or ethnic composition, and variables of self-identification such as Afro-descendant, Afro Mexican, or indigenous language in the different surveys that it conducted? The Committee had received information regarding discrimination against people with brown or dark skin tones. Could statistics and information be provided on socio-economic indicators of different ethnic groups likely to be victims of discrimination? The Committee received information that the 2011 Constitution did not include skin tone or race as prohibited grounds of discrimination. Could the delegation comment on this? Why were race, skin tone and descent not recognised as prohibited grounds of discrimination in the Constitution?
According to a report received by the Committee, there were concerns regarding the spread of stigmatisation and racial hatred narratives in public and on social media, including by State authorities. Could the Committee be provided with a progress report on the adoption of the draft decree before Senate which would bring the Federal Criminal Code in line with article 4 of the Convention? Did the eight proposed amendments to the Criminal Code include the criminalisation of monuments and symbols that celebrated colonialism and indirectly communicated racist hate speech towards indigenous peoples, Afro Mexicans, Afro descendants and other racialised groups?
What was the current budget of the National Council to Prevent Discrimination? What was the difference between the mandate of the National Council and the National Human Rights Commission and had mechanisms been put in place to coordinate the activities of the two institutions? What was the number of cases of racial discrimination reported to the police, the number of those investigated, and the number of perpetrators who were successfully prosecuted?
The Committee noted with appreciation the measures taken to implement the recommendations it had made in its previous concluding observations on access to justice, including the accreditation of public defenders who could speak indigenous languages, the appointment of translators who could speak indigenous languages, training provided by the Federal Judicial Training School on issues of discrimination, and specialised indigenous courts, amongst others.
However, the Committee had received reports that a disproportionate number of indigenous peoples were in pre-trial detention and that displaced indigenous peoples continued to experience discrimination and racism in the criminal justice system and were often subjected to attacks, including assassinations. What measures were being taken to address these challenges? How many judges were there from the indigenous peoples and Mexicans of African descent communities? Could information be provided on the Justice Plan and the initial assessment of its implementation since July 2023?
The Committee had received reports of racial profiling by the National Institute of Migration and the National Guard which targeted black, brown, indigenous peoples and Afro Mexicans at immigration check points throughout the country. What measures were being taken to prevent racial profiling by these officials? How was accountability for racial profiling, in line with the Committee’s general recommendation no. 36, being ensured? What actions had been taken against these officials?
What measures were being taken to prevent the spread of messages in public and social media platforms, which promoted the dissemination of racial hatred and stereotypes? What was being done to improve public information and education on the history of Africa and the contribution of people of African descent in Mexico? In 2021, the Federal Telecommunications Institute granted 467 new licenses to provide broadcasting and telecommunication services for social, community, indigenous or public use. Of these, how many licenses were for indigenous use? How many licenses for indigenous use were granted in 2023?
The Committee also received information that in February 2019, Samir Flores Soberanes, who worked in the community Amiltizinko, was murdered. He was opposed to the realisation of the Morelos Integral Project and had used community radio to denounce the implications of the project. Could information on these allegations be provided? What measures had been adopted to protect the safety of journalists, indigenous leaders and community communicators, especially those who denounced human rights violations? Could information on the investigation of the murder of Samir Flores Soberanes be provided?
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said information had been received on the arbitrary detention of migrants based on racial profiling. Could an explanation be provided? Racial profiling was observed as a systematic practice; could further information be provided on this? Immigration control personnel targeted black, brown and indigenous Mexicans who were frequently detained and sometimes wrongly deported. What was the status of the law regarding racist discriminatory checks? What was Mexico doing to overcome racial profiling?
GUN KUT, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said the previous concluding observations dated back to September 2019 and a follow-up report had been expected in one year. The State party duly reported in one year which was appreciated. The Committee had urged the State party to criminalise acts of racial discrimination. Could final information be provided about the draft in the Senate which would solve this issue? The Committee had recommended that the State party adopt necessary measures to protect human rights defenders and journalists. While some information had been provided, more was needed.
A Committee Expert asked if there was overcrowding in prisons? There had been information of prisoners being released due to amnesty. Why was this the case?
Another Expert asked if the curriculum in schools was focused on education to combat racism? Did the Decade for People of African Descent help bring awareness to the strategies to eliminate racial discrimination?
A Committee Expert said in the past, Mexican children had been captured and tortured by United States authorities at the borders and had been taken away from their parents. Were these children able to see their parents again? Soon, presidential elections would be held in the United States, and this behaviour could be resumed. How would the Government of Mexico react to arbitrary racist decisions by the United States authorities on the matter of refugees or migrants?
Another Expert asked how many times the delegation had met with civil society when preparing the report?
Responses by the Delegation?
The delegation said the President of the National Council to Prevent Discrimination had been appointed in May 2022. The federal law was currently being amended in regard to discrimination. There were 29 federal institutions which had one anti-discrimination clause in their local institutions. The agencies had a law to prevent and eliminate discrimination. A reform of the Criminal Code was being undertaken, which would amend article 149. There had been a progressive increase in the budget of the National Council to Prevent Discrimination. The budget earmarked for 2024 was above 9.7 million dollars. The Mexican State had a specialised institute for the people of African descent. This institution had several rules when it came to indigenous peoples. In Mexico, there were more than 23 million people who considered themselves to be indigenous. More than 7.3 million people spoke an indigenous language.
The Population Housing Census of 2020 registered that two per cent of the population recognised themselves at Afro-Mexican. A catalogue would be published, which included registered indigenous communities in Mexico. The justice system strove to recognise the capacity of indigenous communities. There were 17 plans with 23 indigenous communities in two federal entities of the country. These plans aimed to provide remedy for historic debt, vis-a-vis the State and the indigenous communities. These plans were implemented with the federal authorities of the community and helped to repair historical wounds. The 2020 Census had aimed to identify the percentage of people who self-identified as persons of African descent. More than 700 irregular settlements were identified through the Census.
A case in the Supreme Court had shown the need to take in the customs and traditions of indigenous communities before issuing a criminal sentence. Another issue was how to consider the use of indigenous languages in criminal cases. It was important to ensure there were interpreters, and also that the person understood Spanish. A reform had given competence to judges to hear amnesty cases; 140 cases of indigenous communities had been heard, and several had been solved with a favourable result.
The Mexican President had sent an initiative on constitutional reform to the Congress that aimed to recognise that all indigenous persons had the right to be provided with interpretation and assistance. The Institute for Indigenous Languages had a register, which could be drawn upon to find indigenous translators. As of 2023, there were over 200 indigenous translators providing linguistic services.
Questions by Committee Experts
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said the majority of the questions had not been responded to. How many complaints had been received since the President of the National Council to Prevent Discrimination had been appointed? The questions regarding racial profiling, combatting racial stereotypes and access to justice needed to be addressed. Could more information about the historic debt be provided? How much land had been given to these communities?
Another Expert asked about the indigenous residential school programme which was geared to ensure access to education. Did support mean supplementary or free tuition for certain ages?
A Committee Expert asked if Mexico was considering adopting an act or a law to protect human rights defenders?
An Expert asked about the Constitution which seemed to violate the right to the fair trial; could more information be provided?
GUN KUT, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, asked about the draft decree and laws in front of the Senate? Would these be implemented, and when?
Responses by the Delegation?
The delegation said there was a public policy in Mexico which protected over 2,000 people. While the murder of Samir Flores Soberanes had taken place, as a result of this policy, 11 people were granted over 20 protection measures. A list of crimes had been introduced which justified pre-trial detention. Four basic instruments had been used to train everyone in the judiciary, including a protocol on persons of African descent. There was a manual on how stereotypes affected the justice system.
The National Survey on Discrimination included a question for people to identify their own skin colour. In 2019, the national register for detentions was created to prevent violations of the human rights of detainees. In 2023, Mexico welcomed the visit of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, which met with 34 local institutions. The Committee was invited to review the preliminary conclusions of the Working Group. Many measures were being adopted to reduce instances of pre-trial detention.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur for the report of Mexico, said despite various legislations, there were still violations against indigenous peoples, which showed deep-rooted racial discrimination. The Committee had received information that an amendment of provisions of the Political Constitution of Mexico was announced to ensure the protection and recognition of indigenous peoples. Could information on the status of the reform be provided? How were the consultation processes carried out with indigenous peoples? How were their needs and proposals taken into account and integrated into the reform? How did the government or local authorities identify indigenous peoples for implementing programmes? According to several reports, indigenous peoples in Mexico had been subject to racism, discrimination, exploitation, and inequality. Could the delegation respond to these claims?
What were the results of the implementation of the Special Programme for Indigenous and Afro-Mexican Peoples 2021-2024 and the implementation of the Institutional Programme 2020-2024? According to the National Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy, in the year 2020, 73.2 per cent of Mexico’s indigenous populations experienced multidimensional poverty. What measures had been implemented to reduce the levels of poverty and inequality affecting indigenous peoples? What efforts had been made to level up the academic achievement of indigenous peoples and to improve their school enrolment? What was being done to improve access to education for indigenous peoples? How would the infrastructure and services in indigenous schools be improved?
What measures had been taken to fight discrimination of indigenous peoples in accessing employment and discrimination in the workplace? What was being done to protect indigenous women working as domestic workers? Could information be provided on the disproportionate burden of ecological degradation and climate change experienced by indigenous, Afro-descendant, black and brown communities? The National Guard, per the Mexican Constitution, was a civilian institution, but in practice it had been militarised. Reports had been received that many women in Mexico who had experienced community violence identified a soldier or marine as their aggressor. Could this be explained?
Had Mexico taken concrete measures for the prevention of the internal displacement of indigenous peoples and for safeguarding and protecting their rights? What had been done to keep indigenous peoples’ culture, tradition and language, and protect their psychological security? Forced displacements were often linked to paramilitary groups articulated to municipal, state and federal power structures. Could the State explain this? What measures had the State taken to prevent and settle territorial conflicts?
In the period of 2019-2021, the federal and state governments in Mexico had initiated mega-projects throughout the country affecting the territories of indigenous peoples. What environmental and human rights impact assessments were carried out prior to the implementation of projects which may affect indigenous peoples? The Maya train project had been presented as a windfall for the local economy, job availability, and regional and national development. However, the project had created controversy and it contravened against international law, specifically in relation to the matter of free, prior, and informed consent from the indigenous communities impacted by the project. Could detailed information be provided?
A Committee Expert asked about the more than 400 complaints against the National Guard? How were these handled?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the State had a strong commitment to the protection of indigenous peoples and Afro-Mexicans. These people were recognised as rights holders, which allowed them to have a cross-cutting relationship with the State of Mexico and its institutions. The right of the Mexican people to preserve and safeguard their cultural heritage was recognised, as well as the importance of preserving habitats, land and sacred places. A definition was proposed for indigenous and Afro-Mexican groups. This catalogue of rights included the right to cultural entity, spirituality, the promotion and protection of knowledge, and contribution to the national history. The initiative proposed to add a section regarding the rights of Afro-Mexican and indigenous women, and indigenous childhood.
There was a goal to build communication channels within indigenous communities. Communities created their own artisanal pathways and roads and had done the work. There had been a consultation process for the report, which took place in federal entities. One forum heard from the Afro-Mexican community, and the other from migrants. The law on the consultation of Afro-Mexicans was adopted in 2021 and was currently being discussed. The goal was to see the provision come into force, so there would be a law on prior consultation. A federal law for the protection of cultural heritage of people of Afro-Mexican communities had been passed in 2017. In 2023, 3.3 million adults living in indigenous communities received a bi-monthly stipend of 300 dollars. The goal of the welfare programme for indigenous peoples was to contribute to the wellbeing of this group, safeguarding their land and territories.
Around 19 million dollars had been provided to economic projects. Between 2021 to 2023, more than 1,000 projects were implemented to support cultural heritage, at the cost of around 10 million dollars. Resources were being provided at the value of over one million dollars for indigenous peoples to obtain medical care. A university had been created for the Yaki community, done in coordination with the community authorities. In 2023, the President had signed and issued a decree to protect sacred areas and places of pilgrimage, and created a commission for the routes of certain indigenous communities. Consultations had been held with different authorities and representatives on environmental projects, including the Mayan train project.
There had been 425 cases reported based on discrimination since 2014. In 2023, there had been 26 resolutions. Some of these cases were settled, but this was only allowed in non-serious cases of discrimination.
Internal displacement was an issue which the Government was paying attention to. The country had received a visit from the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, and a law had been introduced to address this phenomenon. The Ombudsman had represented the interests of 17 people belonging to indigenous communities. A manual was published on enforced displacement to gather standards so that these could be used within the justice system.
A guide had been implemented for the federal judiciary which was available in multiple indigenous languages. A new collaboration project was being started to communicate through community radios and other non-traditional means, in collaboration with the national institute of indigenous languages. As stated by the Special Rapporteur, the people should not adapt to the justice system, but rather the justice system should adapt to the people. Therefore, the State had begun working with indigenous peoples, people of African descent, and people on the move to see what practices the justice institution needed to change. This would then lead to policies that would be implemented throughout the year.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert asked how long it would take for indigenous peoples to enjoy a high standard of living and all rights? When would they stop being discussed as marginalised people?
Another Expert said the Mayan train project was being implemented without the free, prior and enforced consent of indigenous people. Could more information on this be shared?
