Mexican Migration: Remittances and Human Rights Violations
According to the Multilateral Investment Fund (MIF) report “Remittances to Latin America and the Caribbean in 2013,” the United States is the source of approximately three-quarters of the influx of remittances received by Latin American countries. Additionally, it is calculated that of the 21 million migrants from this region, 54.2 percent come from Mexico and 14.4 percent from Central America.
The need to obtain a development alternative and the increase in violence in the past few years have driven thousands of people in Central America to migrate to the United States, but they must first cross Mexico and face the dangers that this entails. The international interest brought about by the increase in migrant minors has called into question the response of certain levels of government of our country to this situation, and the general treatment of migrants.
This past Aug. 18, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights stated that Mexico has been aware of the crisis regarding minors for two years (since 2012), and reported that the steps Mexico has taken to combat it have clearly been inefficient. It also added that our country has never had a systematic policy for protecting migrants.
In this sense, the Migration and Human Rights Department of the Institute for Security and Democracy (INSYDE) documented and analyzed the experience of migrants during their transit through Mexico throughout 2013, and especially its relationship with the agents of the Mexican National Institute of Migration (INM), with the aim of detecting the migration flow patterns and migrant treatment.
One of the most daunting findings of the “Report on Immigration Detention Centers in Iztapalapa, Puebla and Saltillo of the National Migration Institute, 2013” is that violations of migrants’ human rights are not isolated incidents, since, according to the information that was gathered, it is an institutionalized practice. Therefore, combating these actions requires a conscious and in-depth process of restructuring and prioritizing the human rights issue.
Through carrying out random interviews with migrants that passed through the aforementioned centers, it was concluded that at least 10 percent of those interviewed claimed that the agents had asked them for up to $100 to allow them to continue on their journey. They stated that when they were detained, there was an excessive use of force, which even left marks or injuries, and that periods of up to 15 hours went by without receiving food or water.
But the most alarming piece of information is that among those who confessed to being a victim of threats of torture, solitary confinement, extortion and corruption, not a single person formally reported what happened. They feared being reprimanded and lacked knowledge about their rights. In some cases, they even justified the abuse and attacks from the agents by saying they had traveled through the country without documentation or in an irregular manner.
With the aim of eliminating these practices, INSYDE made various recommendations to the INM. First, it advised the Internal Control Office and the attorney general to actively collaborate in investigating, processing and sanctioning — both administratively and under criminal law — public servants that have committed an act of corruption, a crime or a violation on human rights.
Second, it suggested expanding the access of immigration detention centers in order to make their management transparent and to allow unrestricted monitoring of human rights, legal advice and journalistic work.
Last, it recommended guaranteeing access to decent living conditions, thereby avoiding the overcrowding of the centers.
With this in mind, let us remember the words of President Enrique Peña Nieto in his recent visit to Los Angeles, California: “This is an appropriate occasion to say that, sadly, we know some states have not evolved as much as California, which still skimp on recognition and, even worse, on the rights of immigrants. Far from helping your states, those actions merely affect the principles and values of democracy, respect toward human rights and equality that we defend in North America.”
The problem of migration is gaining significant attention, given that in a recent U.S. mandate, President Obama nominated María Echaveste, a Texas-born attorney and anthropologist, as the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. She is the daughter of Mexican immigrants who has distinguished herself as an expert and advocate for immigration reform and civil rights.
It must equally be kept in mind that Pope Francis sent the secretary of the Vatican state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, last July to represent him in the Mexico/Holy See Colloquium on International Migration and Development. Cardinal Parolin emphasized that no one can be indifferent toward the migrant tragedy. This indicates that the migration phenomenon should start being treated, as it ought to be, with justice and solidarity.
The need to obtain a development alternative and the increase in violence in the past few years have driven thousands of people in Central America to migrate to the United States, but they must first cross Mexico and face the dangers that this entails. The international interest brought about by the increase in migrant minors has called into question the response of certain levels of government of our country to this situation, and the general treatment of migrants.
This past Aug. 18, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights stated that Mexico has been aware of the crisis regarding minors for two years (since 2012), and reported that the steps Mexico has taken to combat it have clearly been inefficient. It also added that our country has never had a systematic policy for protecting migrants.
In this sense, the Migration and Human Rights Department of the Institute for Security and Democracy (INSYDE) documented and analyzed the experience of migrants during their transit through Mexico throughout 2013, and especially its relationship with the agents of the Mexican National Institute of Migration (INM), with the aim of detecting the migration flow patterns and migrant treatment.
One of the most daunting findings of the “Report on Immigration Detention Centers in Iztapalapa, Puebla and Saltillo of the National Migration Institute, 2013” is that violations of migrants’ human rights are not isolated incidents, since, according to the information that was gathered, it is an institutionalized practice. Therefore, combating these actions requires a conscious and in-depth process of restructuring and prioritizing the human rights issue.
Through carrying out random interviews with migrants that passed through the aforementioned centers, it was concluded that at least 10 percent of those interviewed claimed that the agents had asked them for up to $100 to allow them to continue on their journey. They stated that when they were detained, there was an excessive use of force, which even left marks or injuries, and that periods of up to 15 hours went by without receiving food or water.
But the most alarming piece of information is that among those who confessed to being a victim of threats of torture, solitary confinement, extortion and corruption, not a single person formally reported what happened. They feared being reprimanded and lacked knowledge about their rights. In some cases, they even justified the abuse and attacks from the agents by saying they had traveled through the country without documentation or in an irregular manner.
With the aim of eliminating these practices, INSYDE made various recommendations to the INM. First, it advised the Internal Control Office and the attorney general to actively collaborate in investigating, processing and sanctioning — both administratively and under criminal law — public servants that have committed an act of corruption, a crime or a violation on human rights.
Second, it suggested expanding the access of immigration detention centers in order to make their management transparent and to allow unrestricted monitoring of human rights, legal advice and journalistic work.
Last, it recommended guaranteeing access to decent living conditions, thereby avoiding the overcrowding of the centers.
With this in mind, let us remember the words of President Enrique Peña Nieto in his recent visit to Los Angeles, California: “This is an appropriate occasion to say that, sadly, we know some states have not evolved as much as California, which still skimp on recognition and, even worse, on the rights of immigrants. Far from helping your states, those actions merely affect the principles and values of democracy, respect toward human rights and equality that we defend in North America.”
The problem of migration is gaining significant attention, given that in a recent U.S. mandate, President Obama nominated María Echaveste, a Texas-born attorney and anthropologist, as the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. She is the daughter of Mexican immigrants who has distinguished herself as an expert and advocate for immigration reform and civil rights.
It must equally be kept in mind that Pope Francis sent the secretary of the Vatican state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, last July to represent him in the Mexico/Holy See Colloquium on International Migration and Development. Cardinal Parolin emphasized that no one can be indifferent toward the migrant tragedy. This indicates that the migration phenomenon should start being treated, as it ought to be, with justice and solidarity.