Report no. 58/15 petition 348-09



Download 193.79 Kb.
Page1/9
Date23.02.2021
Size193.79 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9







REPORT No. 58/15

PETITION 348-09

REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY
JOSÉ ALFREDO JIMÉNEZ MOTA AND FAMILY

MEXICO


OEA/Ser.L/V/II.156

Doc. 10

17 October 2015

Original: Spanish




Approved by the Commission at its session No. 2046 held on October 17, 2015
156TH Regular Period of Session.






Cite as: IACHR, Report No. 58/15, Petition 348-09. Admissibility. José Alfredo Jiménez Mota and family. Mexico. 17 October 2015.






www.cidh.org


REPORT No. 58/151

PETITION P-348-09

JOSÉ ALFREDO JIMÉNEZ MOTA

ADMISSIBILITY



MEXICO

OCTOBER 17, 2015





  1. SUMMARY




  1. On March 11, 2009, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or the “IACHR”) received a complaint from the Inter American Press Association (hereinafter “the petitioner” or “the IAPA”) alleging the international responsibility of the State of Mexico (hereinafter "the State" or "Mexico" or "Mexican State") for the violation of rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter the “American Convention” or the “Convention”), as a result of the kidnapping and disappearance of journalist José Alfredo Jiménez Mota.




  1. The petition is related to the alleged kidnapping and subsequent disappearance of journalist José Alfredo Jiménez Mota of the newspaper El Imparcial on April 2, 2005, in the city of Hermosillo, State of Sonora, Mexico. The petitioner alleges that the disappearance was the consequence of Jiménez Mota’s kidnapping by a group with ties to organized crime, with the possible collaboration of public officials, for reasons connected to his profession. It maintained that the investigative actions taken by the State have not produced effective results; the direct perpetrators have not been identified, and the victim’s whereabouts remain unknown. Accordingly, the petitioner asked the IACHR to find the Mexican State internationally responsible for the alleged violations of Articles 4, 5, 7, 8.1, 13, and 25 of the American Convention.




  1. The State asked the Commission to declare the petition inadmissible. It asserted that the facts alleged therein do not describe a human rights violation, since the State took diligent investigative measures upon learning of the alleged victim’s disappearance. It further stated that the direct participation or acquiescence of state agents in Jiménez Mota’s disappearance had not been proven.




  1. Without prejudging the merits of the case, after examining the positions of the parties in light of the admissibility requirements established in Articles 46 and 47 of the Convention, the IACHR decided to declare the petition admissible with respect to the alleged violation of Articles 3 (Right to Juridical Personality), 4 (Right to Life), 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) , 7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression), and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention, to the detriment of the alleged victim, as well as articles I and II of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. Additionally, the Commission decided to declare the claim admissible for purposes of examining the potential violation of Articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention in relation to Jiménez Mota’s relatives, all in connection with the general obligations enshrined in Article 1.1 of said treaty.




  1. Finally, the Commission decided to give notice to the parties of this Admissibility Report, publish it, and include it in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the Organization of American States.







  1. Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9




The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2020
send message

    Main page