CCPR/C/123/D/2767/2016
1.1
The author of the communication is Lydia Cacho Ribeiro, a national of Mexico born
in 1963. She claims that the State party has violated her rights under articles 2 (3), 3, 7, 9,
10, 12, 14 (1), 15 (1) and 19 of the Covenant. The author is represented by counsel. The
Optional Protocol entered into force for the State party on 15 June 2002.
1.2
On 21 November 2016, the Special Rapporteurs on new communications and
interim measures, acting on behalf of the Committee, rejected the State party’s request that
the admissibility of the communication be considered separately from its merits.
The facts as submitted by the author
2.1
The author is a journalist, human rights defender and founder of the Centro Integral
de Atención a la Mujer (Integrated Support Centre for Women), an organization devoted to
providing protection and support for victims of sexual violence, based in Cancún, State of
Quintana Roo. In March 2005, using accounts given by a number of victims who had
received assistance at the Centre, the author published a book entitled Los Demonios del
Edén. El poder que protege a la pornografía infantil (The Demons of Eden: the Power
behind Child Pornography), in which she revealed the existence of a corruption and child
exploitation ring. 1 In the book, the author described the involvement in the ring, as
principals or accessories, of various public authorities and business leaders, including José
Kamel Nacif Borge, a prominent textile industrialist and owner of one of the largest
fortunes in Mexico.
Criminal proceedings against the author, detention and torture of the author
2.2
In July 2005, Mr. Nacif filed a complaint against the author for defamation and
calumny in the State of Puebla. 2, 3 As a result of this complaint, the public prosecution
service opened a preliminary investigation4 on 12 July 2005; the author was not informed of
the investigation. On 10 August 2005, the public prosecution service brought criminal
proceedings before the Fifth Criminal Court of the State of Puebla. On 15 September 2005,
the Court declined jurisdiction to hear the case ratione loci. On 10 October 2005, the public
prosecution service again brought criminal proceedings before the Court, which, on 12
October 2005, opened a criminal case and issued a warrant for the author’s arrest.
2.3
On 16 December 2005, the author was detained outside the offices of the Centro
Integral de Atención a la Mujer by a group of at least 10 persons, including 3 judicial police
officers of the State of Puebla, 2 police officers of the State of Quintana Roo and at least 5
private agents employed by Mr. Nacif. Four cars, one belonging to a company owned by
Mr. Nacif, were used in the operation. No arrest warrant was shown to the author. The
author was taken to the premises of the then Office of the Attorney General (now the Office
of the Prosecutor General) of the State of Quintana Roo, where she was held in
incommunicado detention.
2.4
That same day, the author was taken by car to the State of Puebla; she was
accompanied by judicial police officers of that State, all of whom were men. As she was
getting into the vehicle, one of the officers grabbed her by the hair and shoved her into the
1
2
3
4
2
The book included the accounts of interviewed victims and was published with their consent.
Mr. Nacif’s state of residence.
Article 357 of the Social Protection Code of the Free and Sovereign State of Puebla, which was in
force at the time of the events, provided: “Defamation consists in communicating, to one or more
persons, the false imputation to another person or entity of an act that can cause dishonour, discredit,
prejudice, or expose that person or entity to the contempt of another.” Article 358 stated: “The
offence of defamation shall be punishable by a prison term of from 6 months to 4 years and a fine of
from 10 to 100 days of wages.” Article 362 defined and criminalized calumny in the following terms:
“A prison term of from 6 months to 4 years and a fine of from 10 to 100 days of wages shall be
imposed on: I. Anyone who imputes to another a specific act defined as an offence under law, if such
act did not occur or if the person to whom it is imputed is innocent; II. Anyone who presents false
claims, accusations or complaints, such being understood as those in which the perpetrator imputes an
offence to a particular person knowing that such person is innocent or that the offence has not been
committed.”
A pretrial investigation carried out to determine whether proceedings should be brought before the
criminal courts.
GE.18-14178