• Due to a lack of trust and transparency, human rights organisations as well as organisations defending freedom of expression and journalists have withdrawn from the Assembly of civil society organisations which is to define the election process of those who will constitute the Consultative Council (Consejo Consultativo) of the Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Journalists in Mexico (Mecanismo de Protección a Personas Defensoras de Derechos Humanos y Periodistas).

• The organisations wish to take this opportunity to reiterate their commitment to the establishment of an effective mechanism to protect and prevent crimes against human rights defenders and journalists, once the necessary conditions are guaranteed that will allow for inclusive participation.

A group of organisations defending human rights, freedom of expression and journalists has participated since the beginning of the consultation process to draft a Law for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Journalists, as well as in the subsequent consultations to define the regulations and protocols for corresponding actions. They decided to withdraw from the Assembly of civil society organisations that is to define the election process of those who will constitute the Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Journalists in Mexico, for the following reasons:

1. The invitation process was designed and implemented unilaterally by the Ministry of the Interior (Secretaría de Gobernación), which selected the organisations who were to participate in the Assembly without indicating the criteria behind the decision. During the Assembly session, the Ministry’s representative attempted to deny this. Once the session was opened, the concern was expressed that most of the organisations present did not in fact comply with the requisites set out in the Ministry’s invitation to the Assembly. It was asked that these criteria be made available to the participating organisations, so they could ensure that they fulfilled the requisites detailed in the invitation. This suggestion was rejected.

2. The National Human Rights Commission (Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos, CNDH), Assembly organiser, did not ensure the conditions that would permit a constructive, proactive dialogue in the Assembly, which hindered the recognition and resolution of the issues raised at the session’s commencement.

3. Appropriate conditions were not guaranteed to ensure that organisations not based in Mexico City could participate in the Assembly’s deliberation and decision-making processes. Consequently, their voices were neither heard nor taken into account in the session’s deliberations.

4. Finally, the civil organisations listed below reiterate that our clear desire, ever since the initial stages of designing the Law which provides for this mechanism, is to participate in the mechanism. Once adequate conditions of transparency and communication are guaranteed, it will allow us to celebrate a new Assembly of civil society organisations to define the election process of those who will constitute the Consultative Council.

We demand the following points to ensure transparency in the process:

• That the invitation to civil society organisations working for human rights and freedom of expression be reissued using inclusive criteria;
• That the names and resumés of the organisations, human rights defenders and journalists who have registered in the proceedings be published;
• That the names and resumés of the candidates to the Consultative Council of the Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Journalists also be made public;
• That the Assembly, where candidate selections are made, be observed and monitored by the press and individuals or bodies who are interested in this process.

Article 19

World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC)

Casa de los Derechos de Periodistas, A.C.

Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental (CEMDA)

'Tlachinollan' Human Rights Centre of the Montaña (Centro de Derechos Humanos de la Montaña 'Tlachinollan')

Miguel Agustín Pro Juárez Human Rights Center Center Prodh)

Centro Jurídico para los Derechos Humanos

Centro Nacional de Comunicación Social (CENCOS)

Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Francisco de Vitoria O.P., A.C.

Centro Diocesano para los Derechos Humanos “Fray Juan de Larios”

Centro de Derechos Humanos “Fray Matías de Córdova”

Mexican Commission for the Defense and Promotion of Human Rights (CMDPDH)

Comisión de Solidaridad y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos

Centro de Derechos Humanos Victoria Diez, A.C.

Centro de Justicia para la Paz y el Desarrollo (CEPAD)

Comunicación e Información de la Mujer, A.C. (CIMAC)

Iniciativa por la Identidad y la Inclusión, A.C.

Instituto Mexicano de Derechos Humanos y Democracia AC.

Propuesta Cívica

All Rights for All’ Network (Red ‘Todos los Derechos para Todas y Todos’, RDTDT) (formed by 71 organisations in 22 Mexican states)

Red Mesa de Mujeres de Ciudad Juárez

Servicios de Inclusión Integral, A.C. (Seiinac)

Services and Advices for Peace (Servicios y Asesoria para la Paz, SERAPAZ)

Mexico City, 8 September 2012