What Brazil can learn from the militarization of Mexico

We spoke to Mexican rights defender Olga Guzmán Vergara about the 12 years the Armed Forces have been used in public security in her country

Rio de Janeiro - Armed Forces on the streets in Vila Kennedy, in the west side of the city (Tânia Rêgo/Agência Brasil)

In 2006, Mexico adopted a national security policy firmly focused on the “war on drugs”. Under the justification of combating crime, the Armed Forces were called on to perform the role of the police and, twelve years later, hundreds of people have been killed in conflicts and thousands of others are missing.

The Mexican case bears similarities with what is being done in Brazil with the operations to Guarantee Law and Order (GLOs) and, more recently, the federal military intervention in public security in Rio de Janeiro. Both in Mexico and in Brazil, soldiers have taken on functions they are not equipped to perform and if they kill civilians, they are judged by military courts.

Data from the Rio de Janeiro Public Security Institute reveal that, in the first month of the military intervention in the state, the main indices that measure violence worsened and there was also a significant reduction in police activities, such as the seizure of weapons and drugs.

To understand a little more about what Brazil can learn from Mexico’s experience, Conectas spoke to Olga Guzmán Vergara, National and International Advocacy Director of CMDPDH (Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights), one of the organizations that monitors and denounces human rights violations in Mexico. Read the interview below:

The issue of security in Mexico has gained prominence in the international media as a result of organized crime violence. The State responded by expanding the use of the Army, particularly after 2017. Can you tell us about this policy?

The Law on Internal Security [approved in 2017] authorizes the military to be deployed for public security functions. This law conflicts with numerous recommendations of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, international experts, international organizations, universities and civil society, which opposed the passage of the law and the militarization of public security, since this violated the Mexican Constitution and international treaties.

The Law on Internal Security dangerously granted powers to the Armed Forces and gave them the autonomy to carry out activities that are the responsibility of civilian authorities, such as criminal police investigation. It’s important to note that the concept of internal security is defined ambiguously and vaguely, which causes legal insecurity and leads to abuse. Moreover, the law has inadequate regulation on the use of force, which poses a threat to rights, such as the rights to life and bodily integrity.

In short, besides running counter to democratic standards and international human rights principles, this law is also a state policy that promotes crimes against humanity, such as murders, forced disappearances and torture.

Why did the State decide to use the Army instead of strengthening the police and strategies of prevention and investigation?

Because the Mexican State does not have the political will to put an end to the cycle of violence and impunity. The impunity that reigns in Mexico demonstrates a passive and tolerant attitude by the Mexican authorities to investigate and punish gross human rights violations and serious crimes. There is a systematic obstruction on the part of the Mexican authorities responsible for investigating the crimes, and the Mexican institutions have proven to be incapable of preventing crimes against humanity from being committed and of fulfilling their international obligations to investigate, prevent and punish the perpetrators of the crimes, especially when they involve public employees.

Looking back, how would you assess the results of the militarization? What have been the main rights violations?

Since 2006, thousands of troops have been called up to carry out public security duties and to employ lethal military force against anyone considered a member of organized crime. This state policy was not accompanied by a legal framework to limit the functions of the Armed Forces, which has caused a series of abuses, including serious crimes that the vast majority of times go unpunished. The escalation of violence in the country has claimed a large number of direct and indirect victims. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to flee their homes as a result of widespread violence, armed conflicts and human rights violations. These crimes constitute crimes against humanity and in some regions of the country there is sufficient evidence to confirm that they are committed in a widespread and systematic manner against the civilian population.

In your opinion, what urgent and long-term measures can be taken to reduce the power of organized crime?

To begin with, Mexico needs to acknowledge the human rights crisis it is facing as a first step in taking action to stop the murders, acts of torture and forced disappearances, and accept the technical, political and financial assistance of the international community.

Then it needs to repeal the Law on Internal Security, establish a plan for the gradual withdrawal of the Armed Forces from public security duties and reform the police in order to strengthen its capacity and efficiency to prosecute crimes. Mexico should set up an International Complementary Mechanism to combat impunity, under the auspices of the United Nations, formed by international experts in criminal investigation. The purpose of this Mechanism would be to strengthen the capacity of the country’s Public Prosecutor’s Offices to investigate crimes such as torture, forced disappearances and premeditated murder when committed on a large scale and as part of a plan or policy by criminal organizations or state institutions.

The country needs to acknowledge the phenomenon of forced internal displacement at the national level. To do so, it must adopt legislation that contains the definition of forced internal displacement. It must also produce data to quantify the scale of the problem, by establishing a data collection system, understand the structural causes of the phenomenon and monitor it permanently.

Finally, Mexico must create an autonomous and independent Office of the Prosecutor-General with its own budget for conducting impartial investigations. The Office should have its own specialized office and the technical capacity to investigate serious human rights violations.