Download the full report - Human Rights Watch

official arrest reports. And each time the report cites such confessions, Human Rights
Watch has noted that the widespread use of torture should be taken into account when
weighing their evidentiary value.
The report also notes when individuals have been charged in disappearance cases. While
being charged with a crime (consignado under Mexican law) requires the authorization of a
judge, it is not—nor should it be read as—an indication of guilt.
In the course of the research, Human Rights Watch conducted more than 100 interviews
with a wide array of actors. These included attorneys general, prosecutors, law
enforcement chiefs, police officers, legislators, national and state human rights officials,
victims’ relatives, human rights defenders, and journalists, among others, as well as a
range of federal officials. We also drew on official statistics, which we sought through
interviews, emails, and public information requests submitted through Mexico’s Federal
Institute for Access to Public Information (Instituto Federal de Acceso a la Información y
Protección de Datos).
In some of the interviews conducted by Human Rights Watch, victims’ families, friends,
and witnesses requested that their names—as well as those of the disappeared—be
withheld to protect their identities. Often this request was motivated by the fear that
speaking publicly about the case could bring harm to the disappeared person, or even
lead to another person being disappeared as retribution for denouncing the crimes of
criminal groups or authorities. Others asked that the cases they shared not be included in
the report, driven by similar concerns. Several state officials who spoke with Human Rights
Watch about disappearances asked that their names be withheld, but permitted us to
include the government institutions for which they worked.
Translations from the original Spanish to English are by Human Rights Watch.
MEXICO’S DISAPPEARED 16