Note: This report was updated 3/27/14; see Appendix H: Errata for more information.

Mexico is a multi-party federal republic with an elected president and bicameral legislature. On July 1, 2012, citizens elected President Enrique Pena Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) to a six-year term in generally free and fair multi-party elections; Pena Nieto took office December 1, 2012. Although authorities generally maintained effective control over the security forces, there were instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently of civilian control and committed human rights abuses.

Significant human rights-related problems included police and military involvement in serious abuses, including unlawful killings, physical abuse, torture, and disappearances. Widespread impunity and corruption remained serious problems, particularly at the state and local levels, in the security forces, and in the judicial sector. Violence attributed to transnational and local criminal organizations, violence against women, and violence against journalists that limited freedom of expression persisted.

The country’s National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) and other sources reported the following problems: kidnappings; physical abuse; harsh, overcrowded prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; and confessions coerced through torture. Additionally, there were reports of threats and violence against human rights defenders and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) persons; kidnapping, robbery and abuse of migrants; domestic violence; trafficking in persons; abuse of people with disabilities; social and economic discrimination against some members of the indigenous population; and exploitation of child labor.

Despite some arrests for corruption, widespread impunity for human rights abuses by officials remained a problem in both civilian and military jurisdictions.

 

Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person, Including Freedom from:Share

 

 

a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of Life

 

Security forces, acting both in and out of the line of duty, arbitrarily or unlawfully killed several persons, often with impunity. As of August 31, the CNDH had received 32 complaints regarding arbitrary or unlawful killings and issued one recommendation to authorities (based on its findings that a case involved a serious human rights violation and merited further investigation or sanction).

On January 9, the government published the General Victims Law, which obligates the government to provide legal, medical, and economic assistance to victims of organized crime or abuse by government authorities. Congress subsequently passed revisions to the law that further clarified who should be considered a victim, the level of compensation to be paid by the state, and the composition and responsibilities of the new National System of Attention to Victims, which the Victims Law established.

On March 18, army personnel allegedly tortured and killed Alfredo Ruiz Rojas and a 15-year-old student in Valles Elizondo, Tamaulipas. According to media reports, the victims were travelling in a car when security forces approached and forced them from their car and into an adjacent army vehicle. The perpetrators then allegedly planted weapons in the victims’ vehicle before leaving the scene. Authorities later found the victims’ bodies at a separate location. The Secretariat of National Defense (SEDENA) and the Attorney General’s Office of Tamaulipas issued a joint report stating that the victims died in a shootout with security forces. However, autopsy evidence of Ruiz Rojas’ body suggested he had been tortured, and initial forensic evidence from the scene appeared to contradict the official account. According to the Human Rights Commission of Nuevo Laredo, Ruiz Rojas’ body showed evidence that he had been beaten in the face, genitals, back, buttocks, and legs prior to being killed. The CNDH contended the incident was a case of “arbitrary detention, torture, and eventual murder” and was investigating the incident.

The military abuse case involving the arbitrary 2011 detention, torture, forced disappearance, and execution of Jethro Ramses Sanchez was officially transferred to a civilian court early in the year. In August 2012 the CNDH issued a recommendation to the former Secretariat of Public Security and SEDENA in the case. Sanchez, an engineering student, was allegedly detained and beaten in 2011 in Cuernavaca, Morelos, by municipal police officers under the command of Manrique Gonzalez Acosta. Although Gonzalez Acosta denied any participation, judicial authorities investigated his alleged role in Sanchez’ detention. The municipal police later turned Sanchez over to federal police, presenting him as a transnational criminal organization (TCO) member. The federal police transferred Sanchez to SEDENA, which took him to one of its military facilities where he was allegedly tortured and died as a result of the abuse. The Military Prosecutor’s Office investigation concluded that military forces tortured Sanchez and that he died on the same day. His body was clandestinely buried in Puebla. In 2011 three military officers were detained. Lieutenant Jose Guadalupe Orizaga y Guerra and Second Lieutenant Edwin Raziel Aguilar Guerrero were charged with the disappearance and torture of Sanchez, while Colonel Jose Guadalupe Arias Agredano, former commander of the 21st Infantry Battalion, faced charges of ordering his subordinates to cover up the crime. Although his case was initially before a military tribunal, in August 2012 the Supreme Court determined that Colonel Arias Agredano must be tried in a federal civilian court in Morelos. In September the Attorney General’s Office issued a warrant for the arrest of former 24th Military Zone commander Leopoldo Diaz Perez for his role in an alleged cover-up, although a district court later suspended the detention order. In November authorities arrested Colonel Marco Antonio Legorreta for his involvement in the case but later released him, citing lack of evidence. On November 28, a federal judge issued detention orders for 15 members of the police and seven members of the armed forces for their roles in Sanchez’ death.

On June 3, authorities in Guerrero state found the bodies of three political activists who had been abducted on May 30. Five other activists escaped their captors and alleged that the mayor of Iguala, Jose Luis Abarca, had ordered their torture and killed one activist with a shotgun. A colleague one abductee called during his escape told reporters Abarca was connected to organized crime.

Unknown assailants in Oaxaca killed several political figures, including sitting mayors Feliciano Martinez Bautista and Jose Rene Garrido Rocha. On June 10, unknown assailants kidnapped and killed Jaime Orozco Madrigal, who was the PRI candidate for mayor of Guadalupe y Calvo, Chihuahua. Police officials continued to investigate the case at year’s end.

Two local legislators from Oaxaca and Michoacan were killed within 24 hours of each other on September 11 and 12. In Oaxaca assailants attacked sitting deputy and mayor-elect of the town of San Andres, Everardo Hugo Hernandez Guzman, while he was eating at a local restaurant. On September 12, four assailants killed Michoacan deputy Osvaldo Esquival Lucatero with machetes.

 

b. Disappearance

 

There were multiple reports of forced disappearances by the army, navy, and police. Most occurred in the course of sanctioned security operations. As of August 31, the CNDH had received 13 complaints of cases involving forced disappearance but had not issued any recommendations. In several cases security forces had detained persons incommunicado for several days. While the federal criminal code classifies forced disappearance as a crime, forced disappearances do not constitute a crime in several local penal codes. The federal criminal code and the legislation of the 16 federal entities that have classified forced disappearance as a crime do not use the same definition, and penalties vary according to the jurisdiction. Sixteen states do not classify forced disappearances as a crime. On September 12, the Jalisco State Congress unanimously approved a reform to the local penal code to define forced disappearances as a crime, punishable by 10 to 40 years in prison, with longer sentences in cases involving minors, women, seniors, or persons with disabilities.

In February the Secretariat of Government (SEGOB) reported that 26,121 individuals had disappeared between 2006 and 2012, although government officials acknowledged the figures were not precise. According to criminal justice experts, most of these were likely to have been perpetrated by TCOs. The SEGOB report identified the groups most vulnerable to forced disappearance as human rights defenders, political and social activists, migrants, men living in areas of conflict, and women and children trafficking victims.

The government published a law for the National Registry of Missing or Disappeared Persons in April 2012 with the purpose of creating a database of information for the National Public Security System to standardize and centralize information concerning missing and disappeared persons. As of October 25, the government had not published the regulations to ensure the database was operable or clearly delegated a government agency to host the database.

Amnesty International (AI) noted that the government’s registry lacked any mechanism to update it when more people are reported missing, or when disappeared individuals reappear or are otherwise accounted for. AI also said that the registry made no distinction between individuals who went missing and those who were forcibly disappeared or kidnapped by criminal groups. The CNDH reported that there were at least 7,000 unidentified bodies of persons killed between 2006 and 2012 in morgues and common graves.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) released a report in February, Mexico’s Disappeared, that documented approximately 250 cases of disappearance since 2007. The examples included 149 cases of “forced” disappearance in which HRW concluded that security officials participated in the crime. The report concluded there were widespread problems with the legal, judicial, and law enforcement systems that significantly contributed to the problem of disappearances in the country. It also maintained that authorities routinely failed to conduct thorough and expeditious searches and investigations in disappearance cases, and prosecutors rarely employed basic investigative practices critical to finding missing persons. In cases where prosecutors investigated, procedural delays and the lack of necessary investigative and legal tools often adversely affected the judicial process.

On April 10, the special prosecutor of attention to crime victims published Protocols for the Search of Missing and Disappeared Persons, to be implemented by all state prosecutors’ offices throughout the country. The protocols abolish the previous 72-hour waiting period before authorities would investigate a missing person’s case and instead require authorities to initiate investigations and searches in the first 48 hours of receiving a report of a missing or disappeared person.

Following a meeting with family members of disappeared individuals in May, the attorney general announced the creation of a Special Disappeared Persons Unit charged with locating disappeared individuals. The unit combines investigators with forensic experts and increases the number of investigators dedicated to disappeared persons cases from six to 12. Human rights organizations were critical that the announcement made no mention of the new unit’s budget or proposed structure, and they were widely skeptical it would have a significant effect on the situation due to its small size relative to the scope of the problem.

The Secretariat of the Navy (SEMAR) paid compensation to the family members, offered scholarships to the victims’ children, and provided psychological services to those affected by the 2011 disappearances of six civilians in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, in response to the August 2012 CNDH statement that unknown elements of the SEMAR were responsible for the disappearances. The specific units involved remained unknown. The CNDH reported that in 2011 military personnel detained the individuals in their homes, places of work, and at other commercial establishments and transported them in SEMAR vehicles to an unknown destination without a court order or judicial proceedings. The six victims remained disappeared at the end of the year. The CNDH reported that SEMAR had been cooperative during the investigations that both the Federal Attorney General’s Office (PGR) and Military Attorney General’s Office were conducting. As of August 31, no charges had been filed.

Kidnapping remained a serious and underreported problem for persons of all socioeconomic levels, and there were credible reports of police involvement in kidnappings for ransom, primarily at the state and local level. The National System for Public Security reported 1,032 reports of kidnapping filed between December 2012 and June 2013, although official estimates placed the number of unreported kidnappings considerably higher. There continued to be reports of kidnapping of undocumented migrants by criminal groups to extort money from migrants’ relatives or force them into committing criminal acts on their behalf.

On May 26, several assailants raided the downtown Mexico City bar “Heaven’s After” and kidnapped 12 individuals at gunpoint. Surveillance video showed the gunmen moving the victims into at least eight different vehicles before driving away from the scene. On August 17, federal police investigators located the decomposed remains of the 12 victims in a mass grave in Tlalmanalco, Mexico State. According to official reports, members of a Mexico City drug gang kidnapped and killed the victims in retaliation for the killing two days earlier of one of its leaders. One of the victims, 16-year-old Jerzy Ortiz Ponce, was the son of Jorge “El Tanque” Ortiz, who was serving a 23-year prison sentence for organized crime and extortion. State and federal authorities arrested 18 suspects, including four police officers, and continued their investigation. On October 21, the Federal District Human Rights Commission (CDHDF) issued a recommendation in the case calling on the Federal District attorney general to conduct an inquiry into alleged official involvement in the kidnappings and murders.

On June 8, SEDENA officials reported rescuing 165 migrants kidnapped by a criminal group two weeks earlier in the municipality of Gustavo Diaz Ordaz, Tamaulipas. The migrants were allegedly traveling through Tamaulipas to the United States when a criminal group kidnapped them and demanded ransom money from their relatives. The victims included 77 individuals from El Salvador, 50 from Guatemala, 23 from Honduras, 14 from Mexico, and one from India. Seven children and two pregnant women were among the victims.

On September 20, John Jairo Guzman Vazquez, a Colombian citizen, was kidnapped with the alleged help of Mexico City police officers, including Apolonio Perez Tapia, a chief investigator with the Mexico City Police Internal Affairs, subsequently arrested for his role in the kidnapping. Four other police officers wanted in the case remained at large as of November 29. On November 20, Guzman escaped his captors and was returned to Colombia on November 22.

On October 8, officials from the Guerrero State Secretariat of Public Safety arrested 18 individuals, including 13 federal police officers, who were allegedly involved in a kidnapping ring in Acapulco, Guerrero. The individuals were charged with kidnapping, murder, and participation in organized crime. No charges had been filed as the investigation continued.

On November 8, officials reported rescuing 61 migrants kidnapped by a criminal group in Reynosa and held for at least a week. The victims included seven minors and individuals from Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and the United States.

 

c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

 

The law prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and stipulates that confessions obtained through illicit means such as torture are not admissible as evidence in court. Similarly inadmissible is any confession made directly to police. To be admissible a confession must be formally recorded before a prosecutor or judge with the acknowledgement that it is being made voluntarily and after examination by a doctor confirming that the suspect has not been subjected to physical abuse.

As of August 31, the CNDH had received 1,084 complaints of cruel or degrading treatment and 25 torture complaints. The CNDH issued four recommendations in cases of cruel and degrading treatment and eight recommendations in cases of torture.

There were frequent reports of citizens and foreign nationals beaten, suffocated, tortured with electric shocks, raped, and threatened with death in the custody of arresting authorities. According to the human rights nongovernmental organization (NGO) Institute for Security and Democracy (INSYDE), other torture practices included hanging individuals from their feet, fingers, or neck. INSYDE also reported that torture methods varied by region. In the northern region, for example, the techniques were reportedly more sophisticated and designed to conceal any evidence of torture. Foreign citizens filed numerous complaints before state-level human rights commissions for egregious mistreatment at the hands of arresting authorities or while in prison.

On November 6, the Supreme Court vacated the conviction of Israel Arzate Melendez and ordered his immediate release, stating that his confession to involvement in the 2010 killing of 15 teenagers was obtained illegally under duress of torture. Arzate had alleged that he confessed after being tortured for more than 30 hours following his arrest. He subsequently spent two and one-half years in prison and had been under house arrest since September 2012 while his case was under appeal. The Supreme Court ruling came more than two years after the CNDH’s 2011 recommendation citing grave human rights violations by the 20th Motorized Cavalry Regiment in Ciudad Juarez against Arzate.

On July 18, the CNDH issued a recommendation in a case alleging that prison officials in Almoloya de Juarez, Mexico State, illegally detained and tortured CNDH employee Arturo Zarate Viten in December 2012. According to the recommendation, police authorities arrested Zarate Viten on allegations that he sexually abused a female coworker before transferring him to the maximum‑security prison Altiplano. Prison officials then allegedly punched and beat him on several occasions while in detention. Despite the apparent physical evidence of alleged beatings, the CNDH recommendation noted that the on-duty physician at the prison examined Zarate Viten and concluded that there were no signs of abuse. A medical report from a different prison physician, however, as well as the CNDH staff’s personal observations of the victim, confirmed that Zarate Viten had suffered injuries consistent with beatings and torture. The report also alleged that the prison officials taunted Zarate Viten saying, “We already know you are from the human rights [organization]. These are your human rights.” The CNDH recommendation said that prison officials targeted Zarate Viten “in retaliation for belonging to a human rights organization.” In August SEGOB delivered a statement to the CNDH accepting its recommendation.

In another example, two Ciudad Juarez municipal police officers reportedly tortured and killed 41-year-old Miguel Angel Gonzalez Parra on May 11. According to official reports, the assailants arrested Gonzalez Parra for drinking alcohol in a public space and transported him to an unknown location. Later that same day, police located Gonzalez Parra’s body in an unpopulated area outside of the city. Following a tip, police arrested the two alleged assailants, who reportedly admitted to the crime. The state Attorney General’s Office reported that Gonzalez Parra’s body showed evidence that he was beaten severely before being killed.

On August 29, the Municipality of Tijuana Internal Affairs Department announced that former Tijuana Secretary of Public Safety and current Ciudad Juarez Secretary of Public Safety Julian Leyzaola Perez would be barred from serving in public office in Baja California for eight years due to allegations of human rights abuses under his leadership. The decision, which included barring Leyzaola’s second‑in‑command Gustavo Huerta Martinez, followed a 2011 recommendation by the Baja California Human Rights Ombudsman regarding accusations of torture and excessive force. In 2011 HRW alleged that Leyzaola was directly involved in the “torture of individuals who had been arbitrarily detained, transferred to military bases of the 28th Infantry Battalion in Tijuana, Baja California, and subjected to beatings, electric shocks, death threats, and suffocation by elements of the Mexican Army for the purpose of obtaining false confessions.” The Internal Affairs Department did not announce any plans to prosecute Leyzaola or Huerta.

The government took some steps to implement preventive measures against the practice of torture, including applying at the federal level, the Istanbul Protocol, which contains guidance on investigating and documenting torture and other abuses. In May the National Conference of Law Enforcement (CNPJ) agreed to instruct all state attorneys general to implement the Istanbul Protocol at the state level. The CNJP also agreed to launch a national Istanbul Protocol training program, which was under development.

Instances of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment reportedly occurred in public mental health institutions (see section 6, Persons with Disabilities).

 

Prison and Detention Center Conditions

 

Treatment and physical conditions in prisons and detention centers were often harsh and life threatening, most notably in state-level prisons. The CNDH and NGOs continued to report that corruption, overcrowding, prisoner abuse, alcohol and drug addiction, and loss of security and control were prevalent in most facilities. As of August 31, a total of 1,060 prisoners had filed complaints with the CNDH alleging human rights abuses while in detention.

Physical Conditions: According to the National Security Commission (CNS, formerly known as the Secretariat of Public Security), as of July there were 247,065 prisoners in 405 facilities, which was approximately 22 percent above capacity. An estimated 95 percent of those inmates were men and 5 percent were women. The official number of juvenile inmates was unknown on a national level due to the decentralized recordkeeping for juvenile inmates.

Health and sanitary conditions were poor, and most prisons did not offer psychiatric care. Prisons often were staffed with poorly trained, underpaid, and corrupt guards, and authorities occasionally placed prisoners in solitary confinement indefinitely. Prisoners often had to bribe guards to acquire food, medicine, and other necessities. Authorities held pretrial detainees together with convicted criminals. Prison overcrowding continued to threaten health and life, particularly in the state of Baja California, where the state sought to address its high incarceration rate (nearly three times the national average) through a combination of increasing facility capacity, early parole, and transfer of federal prisoners to facilities elsewhere. The CNDH noted a lack of access to adequate health care was a significant problem at all facilities. Prisoners generally had access to potable water. In a report released in February, the Jalisco Human Rights Commission revealed that 70 percent of Jalisco’s jails had poor facilities and at least 50 percent were overpopulated. The prisoner population at the Jalisco state prison Cihuatlan reportedly grew by 73 percent over the past six years and was 240 percent over capacity as of September.

The CNDH continued to report that conditions for female prisoners were inferior to those for men, particularly for women who lived with their children in prison, due to a lack of appropriate living facilities and specialized medical care. There were reports that women who lived with their children in prison did not receive extra food or assistance. There continued to be reports of physical and sexual abuse of women while in detention. A CNDH report released on June 25 found that prison conditions for female inmates did not meet national or international human rights standards. Specifically, the CNDH said that female inmates were inadequately prepared to return to society, experienced inhumane treatment, lacked appropriate health-care services, and received inferior legal and judicial services.

The CNDH reported in September 2012 that organized crime controlled 60 percent of prisons. The CNDH indicated that prisons in the Federal District, Mexico State, Tamaulipas, Nuevo Leon, Quintana Roo, Oaxaca, Guerrero, Tabasco, and Nayarit had the worst prison conditions.

Several large-scale prison riots occurred, although there were no reported mass escapes as of September, compared with 130 escapees in 2012. On February 2, a riot at the Islas Marias prison complex in the state of Nayarit left one inmate dead and five correctional employees and three inmates injured. Prison officials reported that the riot involved 650 inmates, with some setting fire inside the cells and breaking through protective fences surrounding the complex. According to media reports, the riot was sparked by the inmates’ complaints over the lack of water and food, limited family visitations, and reduced exercise time.

On April 23, a prison riot at the La Pila prison in San Luis Potosi killed 13 inmates and injured another 65. According to official reports, at least 100 inmates participated in the riot. On August 29, eight inmates died in TCO-related violence during a riot at a state prison facility in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas. According to a report by the state Secretariat of Public Security, several prisoners attacked the victims with shanks in response to a verbal altercation that took place following the victims’ arrival to the facility only hours earlier.

Administration: There were improvements in recordkeeping in the federal prison system, largely due to a transition from a paper file system to electronic recordkeeping. At some state prisons, recordkeeping was inadequate.

The CNDH has an ombudsman dedicated to prison issues, but the office does not provide legal representation for prisoners.

Prisoners and detainees generally had reasonable access to visitors and could observe religious practices. While prisoners and detainees could lodge complaints about human rights violations, access to justice was inconsistent, and the results of investigations generally were not made public.

Independent Monitoring: The government permitted independent monitoring of prison conditions by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the CNDH, and state human rights commissions. As of August 31, the CNDH had made 586 visits to civilian and military prisons to monitor conditions.

Independent monitors are generally limited to making recommendations to authorities to improve prison conditions. The federal system made some improvements based on these recommendations.

Improvements: The federal government opened three new federal facilities in Sonora, Guanajuato, and Oaxaca, each with a capacity of 2,500 prisoners. As of September six additional facilities were under construction. The additional capacity alleviated some of the overcrowding in state prisons where federal prison inmates were held. Nine federal prisons and five state prisons in Chihuahua and Baja California received international accreditation from the American Correctional Association. Authorities added programs to promote rehabilitation and an objective prisoner classification system. They also continued to implement a new model of parole for former inmates placed on probation as an alternative to prison, which will be under supervision of parole and probation officers.

 

d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention

 

The law prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention as well as sponsoring or concealing an illegal detention. As of August 31, however, the CNDH reported receiving 1,407 complaints and issued 11 recommendations to authorities regarding arbitrary arrests and detentions.

On May 30, the CNDH issued a recommendation to the commissioner of national security and the governor of San Luis Potosi in a case involving federal police officials who allegedly and arbitrarily arrested, raped, and tortured a 30-year-old woman in 2011. The CNDH report included, among others, recommendations to the commissioner of national security and the governor of San Luis Potosi to provide psychological and medical assistance to the victim and develop human rights training programs for federal police and other public officials under their jurisdiction.

HRW reported in 2011 that the illegal use of “flagrancia” (arresting someone caught in the act of a crime) was particularly pronounced within the military. The constitution permits the military to detain in flagrancia if suspects are actively committing a crime or immediately following the crime, but HRW concluded the military often used an illegal, broad definition of flagrancia to justify detentions. In most of the cases HRW documented, military reports justified flagrancia arrests by claiming soldiers were responding to anonymous tips and complaints by civilians.

 

Role of the Police and Security Apparatus

 

The federal police, under the CNS, as well as state and municipal police, have primary responsibility for law enforcement and the maintenance of order. SEDENA, which oversees the army and the air force, and SEMAR, which oversees the navy and the marines, also play a role in domestic security, particularly in relation to TCOs.

The CNDH stated that deployment of the armed forces for domestic law enforcement in the campaign against TCOs led to an increased number of reported human rights abuses by government security forces upon civilians, sometimes with impunity. SEDENA, SEMAR, the federal police, and the PGR have security protocols for chain of custody and use of force. The protocols, designed to reduce the time that arrestees remain in military custody, outline specific procedures for the handling of detainees.

According to SEDENA’s human rights website, based on the 113 CNDH recommendations issued against SEDENA between December 2006 and December 2012 (the most current data available), a total of 186 military members were charged for human rights violations, of whom 38 were prosecuted in the military justice system. Human rights NGOs continued to charge that lack of transparency, institutional bias, and other failings of the military justice system contributed to and encouraged impunity, pointing to a failure to openly and promptly investigate, prosecute, and convict members of the military for human rights violations. The human rights community continued to urge that complaints of human rights violations committed by the military be investigated and prosecuted by judicial systems outside the military chain of command.

The CNDH reported that police, immigration officers, and customs officials violated the rights of undocumented migrants and failed to provide for their safety. As of August 31, the CNDH had received 744 complaints and had issued two recommendations against SEDENA. During the same period, the CNDH received 331 complaints and issued two recommendations against SEMAR; 800 complaints against the PGR and issued two recommendations; and 735 complaints against the federal police and issued three recommendations.

SEDENA’s General Directorate for Human Rights investigates military personnel for violations of human rights identified by the CNDH and is tasked with promoting a culture of respect for human rights within the institution. The directorate has no power to ensure allegations are properly prosecuted.

The CNDH continued to increase its training of military members through training agreements with SEMAR and SEDENA. As of August 31, the CNDH provided human rights training to 262,646 military members.

Numerous agencies and organizations offered training to federal and state police officers in human rights, including the CNDH, which reported training 6,173 police officials as of August 31. Evidence of their effectiveness remained limited. State-level police academies increasingly mandated human rights training as part of their curriculum, but some did not, and the training across states was not standardized.

 

Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees

 

The constitution allows any person to arrest another if the crime is committed in his or her presence, and a warrant for arrest is not required if an official has reasonable suspicion about a person’s involvement in a crime. Bail exists, except for persons held in connection with drug trafficking or other forms of organized crime. In the 20 states that had not yet begun implementing the 2008 constitutional reforms of the judicial system, pretrial release on bond was available only in cases in which the charged offense was not considered a serious crime. In most cases persons must be presented to a judge, along with sufficient evidence to justify their continued detention, within 48 hours of their arrest, but there were violations of this 48-hour provision.

In cases involving three or more persons who organize to commit certain crimes, suspects may be held for up to 96 hours before being presented to a judge. Only the federal judicial system can prosecute organized crime cases. Under a precautionary procedure known as “arraigo” (a constitutionally permitted form of detention, employed during the investigative phase of a criminal case before probable cause is fully established), however, certain suspects may, with the approval of a judge, be detained for up to 80 days prior to the filing of formal charges. Many human rights NGOs claimed that arraigo allows authorities to detain someone first, then seek a reason to justify that detention. In the absence of formal charges, persons so detained are denied legal representation and are not eligible to receive credit for time served if convicted. Human rights groups asserted that authorities used arraigo to obtain confessions using torture. Attorney General Jesus Murillo Karam, appointed to his position in December 2012, was an outspoken critic of the liberal use of arraigo. During a news conference January 29, he stated the practice of arraigo has a “perverse effect” on the judicial system in that it extends the judicial process and eliminates the need to use “more modern and scientific” approaches to bringing an investigation to a timely conclusion.

In May the Federal District (Mexico City) approved legislation to eliminate arraigo and replace it with a similar mechanism called “judicial control,” which allows a judge to order a five-day detention with the option for an additional five days. Several human rights organizations declared the new measure to be a repackaged version of the arraigo mechanism.

Some detainees complained about lack of access to family members and to counsel after police held persons incommunicado for several days and made arrests arbitrarily and without a warrant. Police occasionally provided indigent detainees counsel only during trials and not during arrests or investigations as provided for in law. Authorities held some detainees under house arrest. Human rights NGOs documented, and the CNDH issued, several recommendations affirming that the army continued to detain civilians for extended periods before placing them at the disposition of civilian authorities.

Arbitrary Arrest: As of August 31, the CNDH reported that it had received 187 complaints and issued five recommendations in cases of arbitrary arrests. Many arrests were made under arraigo. On April 25, HRW issued a statement calling on Congress to reject a proposal to reduce the maximum arraigo period from 80 to 40 days. HRW said the practice of arraigo did not meet international human rights standards and urged Congress to eliminate the practice altogether at both the state and federal levels. During a December 2012 interview, Attorney General Karam stated that of the 4,000 individuals held in arraigo during the previous two years, only 120 ultimately were charged with a crime. He noted that these figures amounted to “more than 3,800 Mexicans who were unjustly held in arraigo.”

Pretrial Detention: The law provides time limits within which an accused person must be tried. Such time limits generally were disregarded as caseloads far exceeded the capacity of the federal judicial system, and most state judicial systems continued to employ the written, inquisitorial criminal justice process. In 2011 the Mexican Center for Research and Teaching in Economics (CIDE) and HRW reported that more than 40 percent of prisoners continued to be held in pretrial detention, as opposed to serving time for a convicted offense. Many spent years in pretrial detention. According to CIDE the average detention period for prisoners awaiting trial was two years. Of those tried, 14 percent were declared innocent after having served time in prison, and 85 percent received sentences of fewer than five years. For many the time spent in prison exceeded the sentence.

States implementing the 2008 constitutional reforms of the judicial system, on the other hand, reduced the number of crimes with mandatory remand and presented lower pretrial detention rates. These states were also beginning to adopt other measures associated with the 2008 judicial reform, such as pretrial services, house arrest, bail, and alternative dispute resolution.

 

e. Denial of Fair Public Trial

 

Although the constitution and law provide for an independent judiciary, court decisions were susceptible to improper influence by both private and public entities, particularly at the state and local level, according to CIDE. Civil society organizations reported that corruption, inefficiency, and a lack of transparency continued to be major problems in the judiciary.

The government continued to lack a standardized process for civilian investigators to access case-related evidence from military personnel and bases, as called for by the 2011 Supreme Court decision, which found military jurisdiction in human rights cases involving civilians unconstitutional. The military’s Human Rights Directorate reported that the military has turned dozens of cases involving civilian victims over to federal and state prosecutors since 2011, but information about these cases was not readily available to the public. In October states participating in the UN Universal Periodic Review of Mexico noted that allegations of human rights violations committed by members of the military continued to be prosecuted in military courts, although a non-binding Supreme Court ruling declared this practice unconstitutional.

Although the government made some progress toward limiting military jurisdiction, human rights NGOs urged amending the military justice code to ensure human rights abuses committed by the military are not tried in military courts. Legislation to amend the military justice code remained pending in the Congress as of November.

 

Trial Procedures

 

The civilian legal system is a hybrid system undergoing reform. While it incorporates some aspects of common law and accusatory-style systems, it draws primarily from traditional European code-based, inquisitorial systems. The military also employed a hybrid inquisitorial-accusatorial legal system but continued to move toward an oral accusatorial system. In some states implementing the accusatory system, alternative justice centers employed mechanisms such as mediation, negotiation, and restorative justice to resolve minor offenses outside the court system. Increased use of alternative mechanisms lessened the burden of minor crimes on courts in states implementing reform.

Constitutional criminal justice reform begun in 2008 establishes that by 2016, defendants shall enjoy a presumption of innocence and have the right to attend the hearings and challenge the evidence or testimony presented. A majority of jurisdictions had not provided these rights, however, as they had not completed reform implementation and still operated under the inquisitorial system. Defendants are not tried by a jury.

As of August 31, 26 states had passed legislation transitioning to the oral, adversarial system and were at various stages of training and implementation of the reforms, while six states were still legislating reforms. Three states fully operated with the new oral system, while 13 states partially implemented the new structure. Under the old system, still being used by the federal government, the Federal District, and 15 states (some of which had passed reforms but were still transitioning to the new system), a typical trial consists of a series of fact-gathering hearings during which the court receives documentary evidence or testimony. A judge in chambers reviews the case file and then issues a final, written ruling. The record of the proceeding is not available to the general public; only the parties involved have access to the official file and only by special motion.

The law provides defendants with the right to an attorney at all stages of criminal proceedings. Attorneys are required to meet legal qualifications to represent a defendant. Because of ongoing implementation of the 2008 reforms, not all public defenders had preparation and training to serve adequately on the defendants’ behalf, and often the state public defender system was not adequate to meet demand. Public defender services were placed either in the judicial or executive branch. According to CIDE, most criminal suspects did not receive representation until after they came under judicial authority, thus making individuals vulnerable to coercion to sign false statements before being presented to a judge.

Although the law requires translation services from Spanish to indigenous languages be available at all stages of the criminal process, this generally was not available. Indigenous defendants who did not speak Spanish sometimes were unaware of the status of their cases and were convicted without fully understanding the documents they were required to sign.

According to human rights NGOs, including HRW and AI, judges continued to allow confessions coerced through torture as evidence against the accused. These confessions were often the primary evidence in criminal convictions (see section 1.c.). NGOs reported that judges often gave greater evidentiary value to the first statement of a defendant made in the absence of legal representation, providing prosecutors an incentive to obtain an incriminating first confession.

Where implemented, justice reform also establishes strict guidelines on the use of confessions, evidence, and expert testimony; allows consensual monitoring of telephone calls; and gives police more responsibility for conducting investigations. The reform requires that all hearings and trials be conducted by a judge and follow the principles of public access, immediacy, confrontation, and cross-examination in order to promote greater transparency and allow defendants to challenge their accusers. The law, however, allows the government to keep elements of an investigation confidential until evidence is presented in court, and defendants must have access to government-held evidence.

On April 2, the implementing legislation for the “amparo” law was published to the federal register, formally codifying it. Amparo is a legal procedure, analogous to an injunction, designed to protect persons from any official act deemed to violate the rights enshrined in the constitution. An amparo can rescind the ruling of a court and provide protection against laws and administrative acts and recourse in land disputes.

 

Political Prisoners and Detainees

 

There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.

 

Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies

 

There is an independent judiciary in civil matters to which citizens have access to seek civil remedies for a human rights violation. For a plaintiff to secure damages against a defendant, the defendant first must have been found guilty in a criminal case, which was a high standard in view of the relatively low number of individuals convicted of human rights abuses in the country.

 

Regional Human Rights Court Decisions

 

The country is subject to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court for Human Rights. On February 13, the court granted precautionary measures to human rights defender Luz Estela Castro Rodriguez who, according to the court, faced “extreme risk” as a result of her work with a women’s rights organization in Chihuahua. In August the court reaffirmed its earlier ruling and further extended the precautionary measures to Castro Rodriguez through September 30.

Despite four separate court rulings ordering the government to reform its military code of justice, including its 2009 decision in the case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, the government had not complied with the ruling as of November.

 

f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence

 

Although the law prohibits such practices and requires search warrants, as of August 31, the CNDH had received 465 complaints of illegal searches or illegal destruction of private property and had issued three recommendations.

On July 30, the CNDH issued a recommendation to SEDENA denouncing alleged acts against the indigenous community of Kumiai de la Huerta in Baja California. In July 2012 approximately 30 members of the Second Motorized Cavalry Regiment and six armed civilians allegedly entered three homes without a warrant, raided personal belongings in search of drugs, threatened the occupants, including children, and beat and temporarily detained one young man. The CNDH recommendation instructed SEDENA to investigate the case and offer the victims compensation.

 

Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:Share

 

 

a. Freedom of Speech and Press

 

The law provides for freedom of speech and press, and the government generally respected these rights. Most newspapers, television, and radio stations were privately owned, and the government had minimal presence in the ownership of news media. Media monopolies, especially on a local level, constrained freedom of expression.

Freedom of Speech: On March 6, the Supreme Court ruled that anti-homosexual slurs are not protected under freedom of speech laws. In its ruling the court stated, “homophobic expressions – i.e., the frequent allegations that homosexuality is not a valid option but an inferior condition – constitute discriminatory statements since they can be used to encourage, promote, and justify intolerance against homosexuals.”

Press Freedoms: Despite federal laws supporting freedom of the press, many journalists were the victims of threats, harassment, and violence emanating, in large part, from organized crime. Reporters covering organized crime, including its links to corrupt public officials, acknowledged practicing self-censorship, recognizing the danger investigative journalism posed to them and their families. Freedom House’s 2013 Freedom of the Press Report called the country a ‘dangerous place for journalists’ and categorized it as “not free” for the press due to the threats and violence that reporters faced and impunity for the perpetrators of crimes committed against the press.

The law does not provide a legal framework for issuing permits to nongovernmental and noncommercial community radio stations.

Violence and Harassment: In March the human rights NGO Article 19 reported that there were 207 attacks or threats against members of the press in 2012, of which members of police forces were responsible for 44 percent and organized criminal groups for 14 percent.

On August 19, the CNDH issued a general recommendation to the federal government stating how federal, state, and local governments should more effectively investigate and prosecute crimes against journalists. The recommendation, which indicated attacks on journalists had increased by 700 percent from 2000 to July 2013, included calls to end impunity, designate journalists as a protected class, and ensure that the agencies responsible for investigating and prosecuting cases properly prioritize these cases. The CNDH report also suggested stronger sanctions for authorities that defraud the justice system or are negligent in their pursuit of cases involving crimes against journalists; measures to guarantee the safety of journalists covering high-risk and sensitive issues; reparations for victims of violence; and a full review of the efficacy and competence of the different agencies handling these issues. The CNDH reported that during the year it had registered 98 cases of violence against journalists and that the states recording the most attacks in the period from 2010 to July 2013 were the Federal District (40), Veracruz (30), Chiapas (20), Mexico State (18), and Oaxaca (18). The states with most homicides of journalists were Veracruz (12), Tamaulipas (12), Chihuahua (11), and Guerrero (10), and the states that registered most disappearances were Michoacan (20) and Veracruz (20). The states that registered most of the attacks against media installations were Tamaulipas (10), Coahuila (9), and Nuevo Leon (7).

As of August 31, the CNDH reported four journalists had been killed and two disappeared for reasons presumed to be related to their work.

Perpetrators of violence against journalists continued to act with impunity with only a few developments reported in the investigation, arrest, or prosecution of suspects in multiple cases of violence against journalists since 2006.

On August 7, citing errors in due process, the Supreme Court of Veracruz overturned the conviction of Jorge Antonio Hernandez, who in April received a sentence of 38 years and two months for the murder of prominent journalist Regina Martinez. Specifically, the court noted that the only concrete evidence implicating Hernandez in the crime was the coerced confession he gave after police officials allegedly tortured him. Forensic evidence from the crime scene, including fingerprint and DNA samples, also apparently did not match those of Hernandez. Regina Martinez had worked for Proceso magazine for 10 years and had published reports before her murder that included accusations of local government corruption. In October 2012 the Veracruz State Prosecutor’s Office announced that it had arrested Jorge Antonio Hernandez, who had allegedly confessed to beating Martinez to death in an attempted robbery, and that a second suspect remained at large. At year’s end police continued their investigation.

Censorship or Content Restrictions: Attacks on journalists, threats of attacks, and a lack of adequate protection resulted in significant self-censorship in the media. The extent of, and reasons behind, self-censorship varied by state. Journalists reported altering their coverage in response to a lack of protection from the government, attacks against media headquarters, false charges for publishing undesirable news, and threats or retributions against family, among other reasons. For example, on April 7, police arrested Martin Ruiz, the director of the online news site e-consulta, and charged him with defamation against a senior government official from the state of Tlaxcala. The court released Ruiz Rodriguez after he posted a 35,000 peso ($2,660) bail. The arrest came after the official, Ubaldo Velasco, filed a formal complaint of defamation against Ruiz following comments Ruiz made on his website calling the official a “mediocre” and “shackled old man.” The case remained pending as of September.

In May the Committee to Protect Journalists reported that the lack of adequate protection for journalists had led to widespread self-censorship in the media.

Libel Laws/National Security: Twelve states have criminal libel laws making journalists vulnerable to imprisonment at the state level.

Nongovernmental Impact: TCOs allegedly exercised a grave and increasing influence over media outlets and reporters, frequently threatening individuals who published critical views of crime groups.

There were multiple attacks on media outlets. On February 8, five employees of El Siglo de Torreon newspaper were kidnapped, beaten, and later released with instructions from their captors to relay a message that the criminal group – believed to be a scion of the Sinaloa cartel – wanted “less coverage of the events at the Gomez Palacio Penitentiary.” The events likely referred to the widely publicized unsuccessful mass escape from the prison in December 2012 that left 22 dead. The five victims of the kidnapping and beating were not journalists, but rather employees assigned to the newspaper’s online, administrative, and advertising departments. Two weeks after the kidnappings, gunmen fired on the El Siglo de Torreon headquarters on three consecutive days, February 25-27. The attacks left one bystander dead and two federal police officers injured. El Siglo de Torreon publicly abandoned all crime and investigative reporting in 2009 due to security concerns.

On March 11, Coahuila state newspaper Zocalo, headquartered in Piedras Negras, announced it would no longer publish stories related to organized crime to ensure the safety of the newspaper’s staff and their families. The decision came after TCOs threatened newspaper director Francisco Juaristi’s life using narco-banners posted in various area municipalities. In response to the threats, the federal police dispatched officials to provide additional security to the newspaper’s headquarters.

 

 

 

PLAYA DEL CARMEN PRIVATE INVESTIGATIONS AND COZUMEL PRIVATE INVESTIGATIONS  INVESTIGATIONS

PLAYA DEL CARMEN PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

 

PLAYA DEL CARMEN PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

 

Get the evidence! Call the best Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators and Playa Del Carmen Private Detectives. We can get proof clients with Playa Del Carmen Investigations such as surveillance, marital infidelity, missing persons, cheating spouses, background checks, locate missing persons & more.

 

Our Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators and Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators have extensive training in Domestic, Matrimonial, Adultery, Claims Fraud, Due diligence, corporate and legal investigations. Our Playa Del Carmen Dade Detective Agency is entrusted as one of the most discreet licensed private investigation company in Playa Del Carmen.

 

Our Playa Del Carmen Playa Del Carmen Investigators can gather all investigative information, Playa Del Carmen record search, video surveillance services, due diligence or photography evidence. All data gathered on your domestic, civil, insurance, infidelity or corporate case will be investigated in a discreet way.

 

PLAYA DEL CARMEN INVESTIGATOR

 

Our Playa Del Carmen Private Detective Agency assists with many types of Playa Del Carmen Private Investigations including Playa Del Carmen Spousal Surveillance, investigate Playa Del Carmen Cheating Spouse Playa Del Carmen Marital Infidelity Investigation, civil investigations, adultery, claims fraud, personal injury, Playa Del Carmen GPS vehicle tracking, Playa Del Carmen insurance fraud investigation and more.

 

We have seasoned Playa Del Carmen Detectives. Our Playa Del Carmen Detective Agency has licensed Playa Del Carmen Private Detectives that assists private citizens, spouses, family lawyers, insurance defense attorneys, personal injury attorneys Playa Del Carmen workers compensation lawyers, insurance companies, corporations and other Playa Del Carmen Detective Agencies .

 

Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators from our Playa Del Carmen Investigations Agency are the best in : Playa Del Carmen Marital Investigations, bug detection, tscm, Playa Del Carmen workers compensation investigation, personal injury, home debugging, electronic counter measures, Playa Del Carmen Playa Del Carmen Spouse Investigation, domestic investigation, infidelity surveillance and other Playa Del Carmen Private Investigations.

 

Obtain the solid facts. We have Playa Del Carmen Infidelity Investigators Playa Del Carmen Infidelity Detectives and video surveillance detectives that can investigate a spouse to detect matrimonial affairs in the marriage. Hire a Playa Del Carmen Private Investigator or spousal surveillance investigators now. Let our Playa Del Carmen Private Detective Agency investigate marital affairs with Playa Del Carmen Adultery Surveillance or Playa Del Carmen Spouse Investigation. Our Playa Del Carmen Private Investigation Agency has licensed detectives that will deliver the truth. Our Playa Del Carmen Marital Investigation Services are affordable. All evidence gathering and investigative services are confidential.

 

INVESTIGATOR PLAYA DEL CARMEN

 

A Playa Del Carmen Marital Investigator will provide free information. …hire our Playa Del Carmen Investigators today. Our Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators and consultants can get you the truth you expect efficiently.

 

Playa Del Carmen Private Investigation Services

 

Contact our Playa Del Carmen spy shop . We sell surveillance and counter surveillance products that detect electronic espionage , phone taps, eaves dropping equipment, GPS vehicle tracker Playa Del Carmen spy equipment and other bug tapping or hidden microphones .

 

Playa Del Carmen Detective Services and Playa Del Carmen Private Investigators also inspect vehicles for real Time GPS Vehicle Trackers or Passive GPS Vehicle Trackers, data loggers, hidden mics, hidden cameras, Technical Surveillance Counter Measures, TSCM Electronic De-Bugging Service and other debugging services Playa Del Carmen

Our Cozumel Private Detective Service has assisted many consumers attain the vital truth or evidence for their peace of mind. Our Cozumel Private Detectives have made appearances in a variety of tv shows, media appearances and talk shows for our superior private investigator services

COZUMEL PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR

Stop living in denial…hire a “COZUMEL PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR”

…Call a South florida Private Investigator today  at : 800.743.2313 or 305.264.7878

Contract the finest Cozumel Private Investigators and Cozumel Private Detectives ……..  We can get proof clients with Cozumel Detective Services such as surveillance, marital infidelity, missing persons, cheating spouses, background checks, locate missing persons & more from a Private Investigator in Cozumel.

PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR COZUMEL

Obtain the truth from a Cozumel Private Investigator…Investigate anybody ! If you require the need to hire a Cozumel Surveillance Investigator, Cozumel Child Custody Investigations, Investigator Cozumel Missing Person Investigator, or Cozumel Computer Forensics Investigator…we are the Cozumel Private detective Agency to work with….  Our modern-day surveillance products and exceptionally knoweledgeable Cozumel Private Investigators may help you obtain the effects you request.. Our efficient and classified private investigation strategies and resources are the best and cant be compared to other Cozumel Investigator Agency and Private Investigators in Cozumel.

Obtain the facts… Our Cozumel Private Investigator Agency can grant you the answers you need.

COZUMEL PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

A Cozumel Private Investigator at our Cozumel Investigation organization specializes in Cozumel Infidelity Investigations, gps vehicle tracking, undercover operations, due diligence, undercover operations, Cozumel child custody investigations, Cozumel Bug Sweep Cozumel Debugging, insurance fraud claims investigations, Technical Surveillance Countermeasures Cozumel TSCM, workers comp investigations and internet surveillance…We staff licensed Cozumel Private Investigators and counties in south Florida that specialize in spousal video surveillance, fidelity infidelity investigations, claimant fraud investigation and claim surveillance. Plus our Cozumel counter surveillance specialists and Private Investigator Cozumel TSCM experts offer Office and Home Bug Sweeps Cozumel Debugging services to detect hidden spy microphones, cell phone tapping or cell phone covert audio listening equipment). In addition our Cozumel Detectives can help with workmans compensation surveillance, legal professional legal support,de-bugging, bug sweeps, due diligence and more. Through low profile surveillance and undercover operations, our Cozumel Private Investigators may perhaps help individuals in uncovering the true evidence…

…No matter what the issue our Cozumel Private Investigators may investigate it !

 

.

Mexico City Private Investigators Mexico City Detectives

 

The Mexico City Private Investigator and licensed Mexico City Detectives from our Mexico City Detective Agency are usually hired for Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigation, Mexico City Child Custody Investigation, Mexico City Claim investigation, and Mexico City infidelity investigation, theft, background checks and other Mexico City Investigation Services. Get the proof!

Contact our Mexico City Detectives now for Mexico City Investigators (Investigador Privado Mexico City).

The Mexico City Investigator can investigate Civil, Criminal, Domestic and insurance fraud investigations and workers compensation investigations…..Some common services include; Video Surveillance, GPS vehicle Tracking, Computer monitoring, GPS tracking, hidden nanny cameras, audio surveillance, infidelity photography, written or recorded statements, locate people, home bug sweep, matrimonial surveillance, and other Mexico City investigation services.. Our Investigators are all insured and licensed.
Our Mexico City Investigators also offer the following Mexico City Detective Services; Mexico Citychild custody investigations, neglect, / abuse, personal injury, Mexico City workers comp surveillance, slip and fall investigations, corporate theft and installation of hidden cameras.

Mexico City Matrimonial Spouse Surveillance Mexico City Premarital Investigation Service Mexico City Video surveillance Alimony and Cohabitation and other Mexico City Private Investigations…..Stop being blinded by your feelings and emotions ! Hire our Mexico City detective Agency and move on with your life after obtaining the facts. We have experts at investigating Cheating spouse / cheaters, marital infidelity, unfaithful spouse, committing adultery, having an affair, cheating wife or husband. We understand that Spouse infidelity is a very sensitive topic for a spouse and that it is a very frustrating experience. That is why the Mexico City Infidelity private Investigators at our Mexico City Private Detective Agency have matrimonial consultants and video surveillance experts / detectives to help you investigate the fidelity of the relationship or the marriage.

Our Mexico City Detectives can easily investigate domestic, civil and cheating spouse investigation cases. We also have Mexico City Insurance Fraud Investigators, Mexico City Workers Compensation Investigators, Mexico City Insurance Claim Investigator and undercover private eyes / PI’s.
Furthermore we can investigate matters involving; intellectual property infringement
workplace surveillance, nursing home abuse, cellular phone searches, cell phone trace, telephone Searches, forensic computer service, tscm – technical surveillance counter measures, premises liability, auto liability investigation, personal injury investigation and more.
Call a Mexico City Private Investigator from our spy shops and detective agency for information on bug detection or detecting phone tapping, electronic eavesdropping, taps, bugging devices / tap detectors, anti wiretapping / sweeping, countermeasure equipment and Real time Vehicle GPS tracker sale or rental info.

If you live in Mexico City and are tired of feeling “paranoid”, our Mexico City Private Detectives can investigate for you! If you are concerned about having a Mexico City cheating spouse, cheating boyfriend, cheating girlfriend or cheating lover at home, this is the time to investigate that spouse. Our undercover detectives and spies know the signs of infidelity and can get the proof of cheating or extramarital affair in your relationship. All Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigators understand that a spouse needs to obtain spousal infidelity evidence when it happens. Some Mexico City Cheaters are more difficult to catch than other cheaters; however, our Mexico City Matrimonial Investigators investigate cheating wives, husbands, spouses, girlfriends and boyfriends who are cheating on their partners constantly. We have investigator experts experienced at catching cheating spouses who commit matrimonial infidelity and adultery.

Private Investigator Mexico City

Why continue the agony! Investigate marital infidelity to regain your peace of mind. If you have doubts regarding your marriage or relationship, it is best to hire a Mexico City private investigator or Mexico City spousal surveillance investigator to confirm your spouse is a cheater. Our Mexico City Detectives will confirm if your spouse is cheating, husband is unfaithful or wife is cheating or having a marital affair at work. Get the peace you deserve with a Mexico City Private Investigator. Our Mexico City detective will stop the cheating with infidelity surveillance proof and evidence of the spouse cheating with his or her lover. You have the right to know the truth. Stop living in fear. Whenever you suspect that you have a cheating spouse or significant other who is cheating in the marriage or relationship…give a Mexico City Infidelity Investigator a call before you confront them or take them to court.

Infidelity investigation Mexico City – Infidelity Surveillance can be taken to court if you need. But please understand that a Mexico City Spousal Investigation is usually more difficult than the average case.. Therefore, do not trust any Mexico City Private Investigator that is not a matrimonial infidelity investigator. If you suspect your girl friend, boyfriend, lover, fiancée, date, sex partner, ex girlfriend, ex boyfriend or mistress of being unfaithful…., give our Matrimonial Investigators a call and you won’t be disappointed. Mexico City detective Services will assist you in determining if you have a cheating spouse , cheating husband ,cheating wife , cheating girlfriend at home. Verify adultery or matrimonial – marital infidelity before it is too late. Put a stop to the cheating spouses with infidelity investigation services. All consultations are always discreet… Take the time to call our Mexico City private Investigators for marital infidelity investigations or premarital surveillance service before you marry and make a lifelong mistake. Investigate the cheater now…hire a Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigator and put an end to the lies from the unfaithful cheater after we uncover the affair. Our PI rates are reasonable when compared to any other detectives or Mexico City Detective Agency. We work together with the best Mexico City Divorce Attorneys and Family lawyers in Mexico City Florida.

Our Mexico City Detective Services are the best…No other…Mexico City Detective Agency can match our discretion and cost effective services. Get the facts today…Our investigators understand your personal concerns when you have to deal with investigating marital infidelity in the relationship. That is why our Detective Agency helps all spouses requiring Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigation services, spousal surveillance or marital infidelity investigations. Do not let your significant other continue to cheat or lie. Our Investigative services can assist you in getting the solid truth so you can regain your peace of mind by way of our Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigation services.

If you suspect a spouse is cheating or loved one is being a victim of cheaters…Contact our Mexico City Cheating Spouse Investigator fast.

DETECTIVE SERVICE MEXICO CITY

Mexico City Investigation services – Our client’s can always expect professional and confidential detective services not found by other local detective agencies in Mexico City Florida. Our company employs former law enforcement personnel and investigators with an extensive background in domestic, civil and infidelity investigation services…among other cases.
All of our Mexico City Detectives and Investigators offer complete discretion and confidentiality and always sign a strict confidentially agreement prior to investigating any person. Give us a try and start your investigation with our PI firm…Hire a Mexico City Investigator