CCPR/C/123/D/2767/2016
back of the car. During the approximately 1,500 km journey, which lasted about 20 hours,
she was denied food and the medication she needed to treat her bronchitis and was allowed
to go to the bathroom only once. She was only allowed to make a brief telephone call to her
partner, which was cut off when the author reported that she was being accompanied by
male police officers. She was not allowed to sleep but was forced to remain seated with her
hands behind her back, under threat of being handcuffed. She was also subjected to
psychological and physical torture, including sexual advances and touching, death threats
and verbal and physical violence. On several occasions, one of the officers inserted a gun
into the author’s mouth, moving it around in circles and making sexual comments. The
same agent later ran the gun over the author’s breasts, spread her legs apart and pointed the
gun at her genitals. He then pushed the gun hard against the author’s abdomen and began to
unzip her trousers, at which point the author wet herself uncontrollably, causing the officer
to shout at her that she was a “pig”.
2.5
On 17 December 2005, on her arrival at the jail cells of the Office of the Attorney
General of the State of Puebla, the author was taken to a room where an individual shoved
her up against the wall, opened her blouse and touched her breasts. He then grabbed her
violently by the hair and pushed her head against the wall. Later that day, the author was
brought before the Fifth Criminal Court of the State of Puebla, which ordered her
placement in pretrial detention at the Social Rehabilitation Centre in Puebla. During her
pretrial detention, the author was subjected to further threats and psychological and
physical violence. On the same date, her bail was paid and the author was released.
2.6
On 23 December 2005, the Fifth Criminal Court of Puebla issued a detention order
against the author for defamation and calumny. On 27 December 2005, the author appealed
the detention order to the High Court of Justice of the State of Puebla. On 13 January 2006,
the Court ruled that the calumny charge against the author was unfounded and amended the
order, such that the proceedings against her related solely to the offence of defamation.
2.7
On 10 January 2006, the author filed an application for a declaration of lack of
jurisdiction with the Fifth Criminal Court of the State of Puebla, arguing that the competent
courts to hear the case were those of the Federal District (now Mexico City) because the
publication, presentation and sale of the book had taken place in Mexico City. On 18
January 2006, the Fifth Court ruled that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case and that the
competent courts were those of the State of Quintana Roo.5 On 22 September 2006, the
author filed a new application for a declaration of lack of jurisdiction, arguing in favour of
the competence of the Federal District courts. On 4 October 2006, the First Criminal Court
of Quintana Roo ruled that it had no jurisdiction to hear the case and referred it to the
Federal District.
2.8
On 22 December 2006, the Fourth Criminal Court of the Federal District dismissed
the case on the grounds that the offence of defamation did not exist in that entity and
ordered the author’s release.
Investigation procedure by the Supreme Court of Mexico
2.9
On 21 December 2005, an article was published in the press in which Mr. Nacif
acknowledged the support received from the Governor of the State of Puebla in connection
with the author’s arrest. 6 On 14 February 2006, recordings of telephone conversations
5
6
GE.18-14178
The Fifth Criminal Court of the State of Puebla founded the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of
Quintana Roo on the fact that the complaints by the victims of sexual exploitation that served as the
basis of the book had been filed in that State.
In the article, published in the newspaper La Jornada, Mr. Nacif said: “I told the Governor that this
woman was libelling me, and he said no one is libelled here — and boom, they issued an arrest
warrant for her.” In the same article, the Governor of Puebla said: “If you ask me, this woman is a
delinquent who committed an offence; if she says she is innocent, let her prove it in court instead of
courting publicity in the media.” The Attorney General of the State of Puebla acknowledged that the
author was not notified of the arrest warrant so as to prevent her from “kicking up a fuss” and said
that “reporters should hold on to their stories before they are made public, since their first duty is to
inform the authorities”. When asked about support for the author’s case from various human rights
organizations, such as Amnesty International and the World Organization against Torture, the
3