U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics WORLD FACTBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS BJS chief editor, Carolyn C. Williams MEXICO NCJ 199275 Ernesto Lopez Portillo Translator Carlos Becerril Torres Notice: The statistics presented in this report have been verified against their sources. However, some of these sources contain errors, inconsistencies, and gaps which can not be reconciled. Section I: GENERAL OVERVIEW Mexico covers a total area of 1.96 million square kilometers, making it the 14th largest country in the world. The United States to the North and Guatemala and Belize to the Southeast border it. According to XII General Census for the year 2000, Mexico had 97.4 million inhabitants. This makes Mexico the 11th most populous country in the world. The population growth rate between 1995-2000 was 1.6%. The Indian population was 10,597,488 persons by 1997. In the same year 65% of the population was under 30 years. By 2000 the average education was 7.7 years of schooling. Life expectancy for 1999 was 74 years old. In 2000, according to the United Nations Development Program, Mexico was considered the 55th most developed country in the world. Gross Domestic Product was $4,915 USD per person with an inflation rate of 12.32%. Between 44% and 60% of the entire population lived in poverty. 1. Brief History In 1831 the State of Mexico outlined a general penal code and the first penal code was issued in the State of Veracruz in 1835. In 1871 a Federal District and Baja California Penal Code on local jurisdiction and federal jurisdiction for the republic was issued. Modeled after the 1870 Spanish Code, it was in use until 1929. The so- called Almaraz Code was issued in 1929. Based on the penal law positive school, it lasted 2 years. In 1931 the Penal Code for District and Federal Territories in Common Jurisdiction and for the rest of the country in Federal Jurisdiction was enforced. Its orientation regarding criminal policies was as follows: a new organization for convict labor; prison reform; construction of adequate prison buildings; separation of children from repressive penal functions and initiation of their treatment under educational policies; and completing the convict's rehabilitation with social and economic prevention measures. During 1996 the Federal District Legislative Assembly (Legislative Chamber for Mexico City) was required to legislate on penal matters (formerly a Federation's power). This resulted in a jurisdictional division from the 1931 code, with a separate Penal Code for the Federal jurisdiction, and another for the Federal District in the local jurisdiction (i.e., Mexico City). Mexico's penal system is based on the 1917 Political Constitution in which authority for three branches of government power (executive, legislative, and judicial) are clearly established, imposing state limits for action on private concerns through constitutional guaranties. The Constitution defines institutional limits for law enforcement activities. Article 21 regulates police activities based on four principles: legality, efficiency, professionalism, and honesty. Nevertheless it fails to describe the scope of police duties. Until 1993 penal practice was based on principles derived from what is known as the Causal Theory./1 During that year constitutional reforms used principles from the Action Theory, that modified penal proceedings by introducing subjective elements such as guilt and deceit./2 With this innovation the Public Ministry was commanded to apply a very focused technical juridical practice to probe an offense that had been committed. During 1999 this practice was reversed, returning to the corpus delicti conception before the 1993 reforms. The right to privacy was altered by a penal reform that constitutionally authorized the interception of private communications in 1996. At the same time a federal law against organized crime was reinforced with new applications to penal proceedings. This change involved new penalties and sentences, and incorporated particular proceeding rules and sanctions. With regard to the legal handling of minors, juvenile offenders are defined as youths between ages 11 and 18. The grounds for punishing youths are provided by the Treatment Law for Juvenile Offenses in local jurisdiction matters for the Federal District (Mexico City), and in federal jurisdiction matters for the country./3 This law has been enforced since 1991. In 2000 through a constitutional reform of Article 20, a series of rights were granted to victims of any types of crime that allows them to demand justice. With these rights law enforcement institutions are mandated to protect victims. There have been additional legislative reforms of victim protection legislation. 114*/8*/Dr. Alejandro Gertz Manero, Public Security Secretary, delivered to the House of Representatives proposals for additional reforms to the Code of Penal Procedure in November 2001. They include the following: * Join the victim into the penal procedure. To recognize and consolidate victims' rights, create a new title in the Code of Penal Procedure, namely, "victims and offended parties rights and the restoration of damages." * Create a Restoration of Damages Trust. For all crimes establish a legal protection system to restore damages, as a basic element to social reincorporation and as a means of gaining benefits by which offenders can obtain conditional release. * Establish jurisdictional control over the Public Ministry. To provide victims and/or offended parties recognition as procedural parties with rights and obligations. * Establish no limits for prescribing crimes like kidnaping, abduction and theft of public funds. * Protect witnesses and offended parties from intimidating questioning by creating a summary oral procedure. The proposal is to create a new penal type name, "intimidate denouncer, witness, or offended party with a crime." This will avoid their draw back on initial depositions. * Allow police to become an accusatory party: allow the police to bring complaints before a judge derived from their daily tasks and to participate actively as accusatory parties, and not only as simple support. * Unify Penal Procedures: Transform two procedures into one. Initial investigation done in this stage will be conducted by the judge. * Establish one Penal Code and one Code of Penal Procedure for the entire country. 2. Juridical System Mexico's juridical system is based on the Roman- Germanic tradition in which codification establishes general and abstract norms. 3. Political System Mexico is divided into 31 states and 1 federal district. Each state is divided into municipalities with a total of 2,443 divisions. The Federal District (Mexico City) is divided into 16 political delegations. The President of the Republic is the supreme executive authority. He is directly elected to serve one 6-year term with no possibility of re- election. A bicameral congress, the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, constitutes the Legislative Power. Called the Upper Camera, the Senate consists of 128 senators, who serve for one 6-year period. The Chamber of Deputies, or Lower Camera, consists of 500 deputies who serve 3 years. In both cases re- election is not possible. The Judicial Power's supreme organ is the Supreme Court of Justice. It is composed of 11 ministers whose terms are 15 years. The president of the Supreme Court is elected every 4 years. The Mexican Constitution establishes three penal justice jurisdictions: the federal, the state or common, and the military. Besides concurrence on federal, state, or military jurisdiction police duties are also part of municipal jurisdictions. 4. National Public Security System The National Public Security System (NPSS) was created in 1995 with the issuance of the law that regulates it. NPSS coordinates all public security actions within the three government branches and federal agencies. The main task of NPSS is to provide financial and technological resources for law enforcement tasks that include: preventive, prosecution, and justice administration, as well as social rehabilitation. The highest ranking body in this system is the Consejo Nacional de Seguridad Publica (Public Security National Council), integrated by the Public Security Secretary (chairman), 31 State governors, Defense Secretary, Navy Secretary, Communications and Transportation Secretary, Attorney General, Federal District governor, and the NPSS' Executive Secretary. The allocation of financial resources (in pesos) from 1996 and 2001 was reported (table 1). Section II. CRIMES 1. Crime Classification A. General legal classification. In a broad sense crimes are classified in Mexican law as either serious or non-serious. There are two ways to determine seriousness: (1) by a codified list of serious crimes; and 2) by a rule which states that crimes are considered serious if their punishments are greater than a specified number of years of incarceration. This rule is governed by a formula where the lowest and the highest number of years are added together and divided by two. (For example, in Mexico City crimes are defined as serious if they are punishable by a term of imprisonment equal to or greater than 5 years). It is mandatory for the State to prosecute certain crimes. Others are prosecuted by victims or the legal representative of the complainant. The law requires that all crimes not prosecuted by complaint shall be prosecuted by the State. B. Age of criminal responsibility Generally, the youngest age at which a person can be held responsible for a crime is 18 years. In Mexico City and in the federated states, youths from ages 11 to 17 who commit a crime (in the adult sense of the term) are dealt with under State tutelage in terms of the Treatment Law for Underage Violators./4 For Mexico City this law is based on common jurisdiction and for the rest of the country it is based on federal jurisdiction. In 15 Mexican states (Aguascalientes, Coahuila, Durango, Guanajuato, Michoacan. Nayarit, Oaxaca, Puebla, Quintana Roo, San Luis Potosi, Tabasco, Tamaulipas, Tlaxcala, Yucatan and Veracruz) youths between ages 16 and 18 are eligible for punishment as adults. C. Drug Related Crimes The Federal Government has the sole authority to prosecute criminal acts related to drugs. Neither Mexico City nor any of the States have jurisdiction over drug offenses. Federal law prohibits various drug related activities: production, transportation, traffic, sale, supply (even free), prescription, import, export, assets, financial supply, supervision and publicity oriented towards drugs consumption; contribution, or deviation of chemical precursors, essential chemical products or machinery for growing, extraction, production, preparation and narcotics assembly. Possession of small quantities of drugs for personal consumption is not punished by law. Instead the drug user is submitted to treatment. No sanctions are applied if the drug user claims it is his first time, and if the quantity was strictly for personal consumption. If the quantities between possession or transportation are more than the personal consumption range, and the subject is not a member of a criminal group, sanctions are applied based upon a system fixed in Appendix 1 of the Federal Penal Code. Narcotics are defined as: drugs, psychotropics, and some other substances determined by the Public Health Law, and the international agreements and treatises signed by Mexico. Production of drugs is defined as manufacture, fabrication, elaboration, preparation, or conditioning. Commerce is buying, selling, acquiring, or endowing. 2. Crime Statistics A,B. Crime Data. In Mexico crime may be reported to any one of several different agencies, including the police agencies, the states or the federal government, or to other governmental agencies. There is no standardized procedure for recording crime, and no central repository that collects crime and justice statistics for the entire country, or determines their reliability and validity. For crime statistics various organizations from government agencies to academics, business groups and non- profits, use their own widely conflicting numbers. This lack of uniform reporting has reduced the credibility of government statistics and made efforts to gather data on crime and justice in Mexico subject to limitations and error. However, there has been a change with the creation of the Instituto Ciudadano de Estudios sobre Inseguridad in May, 2002. The institute is a research center supported by entrepreneurs and academic institutions that aims to develop studies for public dissemination in order to provide trustworthy statistics on public security and penal justice issues. Before reliable and comprehensive crime statistics are available in Mexico, the best data are those collected by the federal government. Certain federal statistics are not easily accessible. The readily available data are those compiled by the federal agencies in connection with offenses that are enforced exclusively by federal law enforcement agents. The most reliable data are issued by the Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEGI) mainly through annual indicators and booklets, such as Judicial Statistics on Penal Matters, Mexican Demography Indicators, Annual Statistics for each State. INEGI reports figures starting with the phase of the criminal justice process when the person who is regarded by the Public Minister as "probably responsible" is presented before a judge. Denounced crimes (i.e., crimes that have been reported to the government but for which no arrest has been made) are not INEGI statistics. ("Denounced crimes" is roughly equivalent to the phrase "crimes reported to the police" as used in the United States). An earlier phase of the process, that begins with a complaint and includes up until prosecution by the Public Ministry, is recorded in every State Attorney General's office. This information is not available for public purposes and there is no method to determine the reliability of these figures. One of the tasks of the National System on Public Security (Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Publica, SNSP) is to record criminal activity in the country. There is no regular information concerning global data issued by this system. As a result, there are no public statistics on the number of and nature of crimes reported to the police or Public Ministry. Nor is there national data on the number of arrests, or types of crimes committed by persons that are arrested. Crimes that are never denounced/reported are a statistical issue. Some officials and experts estimate that for every five crimes committed in the country, one (20%) is reported to the police. Because there is no uniform effort to estimate the true value, this percentage may be in error. A private organization has conducted a survey of victims of crime. The results are presented in Section III. But, there is no regular, official government survey of crime victims to use to estimate the number of victimizations that are unreported./5 In Mexico, there is a serious problem of distrust between the citizens and the justice system, due to the citizens' perceptions of police corruption, inaction, and ineptitude, and the very expensive and time consuming penal procedures. In many cases a criminal who is presented before a judge is released 3 days later because his victim -- due to this distrust -- fails to appear before the judge to confirm the charges. It is fair to assume that many crimes are not reported and that official statistics on reported crime understate the true number of crimes (tables 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). For the year 2000, the total number of crimes reported/denounced to the Public Ministry was 1,420,254. (Source: Address by Dr. Alejandro Gertz Manero, Secretary of Public Security, to the House of Representatives in November 2001.) Total 1,420,254 100% Local jurisdiction 1,338,473 94% Federal jurisdiction 81,781 6% Estimates of the number of unreported/not- denounced crimes from 1997 through 2000 were also given (table 7). Data regarding crimes reported to the government was published on the website of the Secretary of Public Security (tables 8 to 10). C. Definitions See text accompanying the statistics D. Attempt. Tables do not include criminal attempts. E. Bibliographic Sources for Statistical Data Presented Above. See Section XVI. SOURCES. F. Crimes by Regions In 1998 the Mexico City's government issued a report on criminal activities for each region of the city (table 11). Section III. VICTIMS OF CRIME 1. Criminal Victimization Survey The government has not conducted any official crime victim surveys. The Banco Nacional de México through its Social and Economic Studies Division has conducted a series of national surveys: 1) Annual Series 1995-2000; 2) National Surveys on Public Spaces (1995-1998); 3) National Surveys on Public Spaces and Households (1999); 4) Households (2000). Between 1995 and 2000, 4,200 persons, over 18 years were included in the survey. The survey was conducted during the referred month. Multiple levels with quotas by sex, socioeconomic level and age were done. The confidence level was 95% with an error margin of +/- 3% (tables 11 and 12). The percentage of violent crime declined steadily between the 1995 and 2000 surveys of victims, from 28% to 19%. This finding was contrary to the general sense that crime had increased in Mexico during that period. Between 1995 and 1998, the majority of victims who reported that they or an immediate family member had been victims of violent crime had not filed a legal complaint (about 60%), while in 1999 and 2000 the majority had filed complaints (65%, 53%) (table 13). Between 1998 and 2000, the government had taken action in less than one-third of the filed cases (table 14). 2. Victim Assistance Federal and State Attorney Generals' offices have enacted programs and special branches to serve crime victims. In the Attorney General's Office for the Federal District (Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal) there is a special deputy office for victims and community services. This institution assists crime victims in the following cases: * missing persons * domestic violence * sexual crimes * violent crimes * drug addiction. The services are rendered by the following: * Victimatel (telephone service) * Centro de Apoyo de Personas Extraviadas y Ausentes (Support Center for Missing and Absent Persons) * Centro de Terapia de Apoyo a Víctimas de Delitos Sexuales (Therapy Support Center for Sex Crime Victims) * Centro de Atención a Víctimas del Delito Violento (Help Center for Violent Crime Victims) * Centro de Atención a las Adicciones (Help Center for Drug Addicts) * Centro de Investigación Victimal (Center for Victims Research) * Dirección de Apoyo Operativo, Estadística y Evaluación (Operational Support, Statistics and Evaluation Office). 3. Victim's Role In cases prosecuted by a victim's complaint the prosecution is dependent entirely upon the victim's initiative. The victim may also file or request a petition of discharge, concluding the penal procedure even before sentence is imposed. Mexico's Constitution, Article 20 paragraph B provides a series of victim's rights. The victim has a right to cooperate with the Public Ministry to provide information and evidence. Although an attorney can represent him/her, the attorney cannot assume the Public Ministry's duties. 4. Legislation on Victim's Rights Constitutionally (Article 20, paragraph B) a series of rights are granted to the victim or offended person. These include: receiving juridical advice; being informed of his/her rights and the penal process; permitted to cooperate with the Public Ministry to provide evidence; receiving emergency medical and psychological attention; damage restoration or compensation; and necessary measures for security and support. There are human rights commissions in the federal district and each state. Their most important task is to protect the inherent rights of every person. When a victim's human rights have been violated, the victim can ask the commissions to act as protectors of such rights. Section IV. PENAL PROCEDURE AND RELATED MATTERS 1. Investigation, search, registry and detention A. Procedural steps. According to the penal process norms (Article 20 paragraph 1), the Public Ministry is the institution authorized by law to investigate crimes. It is authorized to investigate denounced acts that could be considered crimes. This stage of the investigation, called the initial inquiry (averiguación previa), can not begin in cases when penal law states that a complaint or other procedural requirement is needed in order to initiate an investigation by the Public Ministry. Once an initial inquiry (investigation phase) is started, the Public Ministry has sole responsibility for the conduct and control of the investigations. Also it is responsible for arguing before a judge, whether or not to exercise a penal action. It is important to emphasize that during this period the Public Ministry enjoys complete liberty in investigating any matter involving elements of proof, and at the end to resolve whether enough evidence exists to conclude that a crime occurred and the person is probably responsible. The Constitution provides for the creation of a police corporation attached to and subordinated to the Public Ministry to support investigative tasks and criminal prosecution. This Ministerial Police (in some states called "judicial police") is authorized to receive initial complaints; to conduct initial inquiries (to support and protect victims) and to preserve the crime scene as well as the possible evidence. But in any action taken, the judicial police officer must notify the Public Ministry. In addition, all actions must be under the Public Ministry's command. A judicial police officer can not hear initial depositions from the suspect or arrest anyone (except in the case of flagrancy) without an arrest warrant issued by a judge. According to Article 193 of the Federal Penal Code, "flagrancy" exists under certain conditions: when the defendant is arrested committing a crime; when after committing a crime he/she is arrested during an escape; when he/she is directly mentioned by his/her victim or by a witness or an accomplice; when he/she is in possession of means or proceeds of crime; when fingerprints are enough evidence to presume direct participation in a serious crime; and when the initial inquiry is no longer than 48 hours without interruption. Also, in the case of flagrancy, anyone can arrest a person who appears to be responsible for the crime. But they must summon immediately the nearest appropriate authorities who in turn take the arrested person to the Public Ministry (Article 16, Fourth Paragraph). In cases of serious crime if there is a definite risk that the defendant might evade justice, and a judge is not available within a reasonable time, the Public Ministry can order a detention for 48 hours. If organized crime is involved, detention can be extended to 96 hours. The Public Ministry may ask a judge to hold a defendant in jail until the initial inquiry is completed. This can be for as long as 30 days and can be extended for another 30 days upon request by the Public Ministry. Organized crime cases detention could be extended until 90 days. Once a person is arrested, the Public Ministry has 48 hours (96 hours in organized crime cases) to release the case or bring it before a penal judge. Search warrants must be signed by the Penal Judge (Article 16, 8th Paragraph). The initial inquiry stage concludes when the Public Ministry decides whether or not to prosecute the indicted person. B. If a civilian makes an arrest as in cases of flagrancy, he/she must immediately turn the matter over to the authorities and the initial inquiry stage will proceed as described above with the Public Ministry in charge of the proceedings. C,D. Evidence and Restrictions During Investigation. According to penal procedural law, there are no restrictions on what evidence may be considered by the court, as long as evidence does not oppose trial procedures according to the judicial criteria. For organized crime cases the law contains special provisions regarding evidence. The Federal Law Against Organized Crime allows the government to keep the witness's identity undisclosed until the case is brought before the judge. It also allows wire interception (only with judicial authorization), wire recording, and transcription; transfers to still or video images; and special protection for judges, witnesses, and victims. E. Police Investigation Laboratory. To support the Public Ministry, investigative tasks Federal and State Attorney's offices maintain units and offices to collect, preserve, and forensically analyze evidence. 2. Pretrial ("Conditional") Release and Detention A,B. Criteria for conditional release. Conditional release under bail is a right granted to every indicted individual except under certain circumstances. It may be explicitly prohibited by law due to the seriousness of the crime. Also, in cases when the defendant is charged with a misdemeanor or petty offense, the Public Ministry may ask the judge to refuse to grant conditional release because of a previous conviction for a serious crime. The Public Ministry must prove that the person represents a risk to society. In determining the amount of bail, the judge must assess the nature, manner and circumstances of the crime, the defendant's record, and the possibility of restoring the victim's damages and the economic sanction to impose. To obtain conditional release under bail the defendant must agree to the following: guarantee the full restoration of damages; guarantee to pay the expenses of the trial. This applies when the crime, under investigation or process, is not considered a serious offense (Article 399 Federal Penal Procedures Code). The law of criminal procedure allows "conditional release under parole" (Article 418 Federal Penal Procedures Code) under the following conditions: * when the maximum penalty is no more than 3 years (4 years, if the indicted person has a low income); * the defendant has a formal and known address on record with the court; * the defendant has at least 1 year of local residence; * the defendant has a profession, occupation, job or an honest source of income; * when, under the authority criteria, there is no suspicion that the defendant will evade justice. C. Preventive Detention. When corporal punishment is the penalty for a crime, defendants may be held in preventive detention while their trial is in process (Constitution, Article 18). The defendant is held in a different facility than the one where he/she will serve sentence if convicted. D. Statistics In Mexico's Centre for Social Rehabilitation, the number of cases processed increased 35% between December, 1996 and January, 1999 (table 15): the number of sentences issued increased 66% in that same period. 3. Defendants Rights Article 20 of the Mexican Constitution establishes guaranties for everyone. They are as follows: * The accused has the right to pretrial release under bail. * It is prohibited to obtain a confession by force, intimidation, isolation or torture. Confession only before the Public Ministry or a judge assisted by the defendant's attorney is a proof element. * Constituent facts of the criminal charge are the sole legal basis for confession. The arrested person should be over 18 years old, have full knowledge of the charges brought against them by the Public Ministry or judge, and must be assisted by his or her defense counsel without physical or moral violence. Evidence is considered invalid in the absence of any of these requirements and nullifies the confession's value as a proof. Also, a confession as the only support for a penal procedure is invalid. Other proof elements are necessary to validate the process. * In a public hearing within 48 hours after arrest, the defendant must be notified of the cause of the action and the nature of the complaint against him/her. * Every time the defendant requests it, he/she can be brought, in the presence of a judge, before the offended, unless they are minors or in crimes related to rape or kidnaping. * The right to call witnesses and offer proof elements. * The right to a public trial. * The right to inspect all evidence available for the defense. * The right to a speedy trial which means in particular the following. In cases where the law provides for a mandatory penalty of 2 years, the trial must begin within 4 months unless defendant's attorney requests more time to submit evidence. * The right to be informed of his rights from the beginning. * The right to be represented by a defense attorney at each stage of the proceedings. If the defendant can not afford a private defender, the state appoints a public defender. * The right not to have one's detention extended due to his/her inability to cover expenses in the case of civil or analogous responsibility./6 * In the case of a sentence, the right to have the period under pretrial detention to be deducted from his sentence. 4. Investigation and case preparation A,B,C. Investigation, Roles of the Public Ministry and the Judge. As previously noted (Section IV, Number I, Section A) crime investigation and prosecution are tasks that belong exclusively to the Public Ministry, which is supported by its units of special ministerial/judicial police. The Public Ministry is solely entitled to initiate a case and bring it before a judge to begin a trial. The Public Ministry and its police force are exclusively entitled to investigate, gather, or establish evidence and proof elements and bring them before a jurisdictional court. The jurisdictional judge is not entitled to conduct an investigation, but is able to bring evidence into court during trial. 5. Pretrial Diversion Mexico does not have pretrial diversion programs that permit an offender to participate in a special treatment program (such as drug rehabilitation) and to have their charges dismissed if they successfully complete the program. However, the Public Ministry is entitled to settle cases when the facts are not considered as crimes. The settlements avoid initiating a preliminary investigation. An example of this can be in minor harm cases (when life is not threatened and injuries take no more than 15 days to heal), or in property damage cases (for example, a car accident) and the parties reach a settlement to restore the property damages. In such a case the offended party concedes pardon or forgiveness and the Public Ministry ends the trial causes. 6. Case Dismissal A,B,C. Statistics and reasons to conclude a case without trial. Cases can be concluded without a trial when the victim or the offended party withdraws the complaint. The Public Ministry is allowed to encourage settlements between the victims and the offenders. There is a procedure called "overseeing the case" which allows the case to come to a conclusion without going to trial. The Public Ministry is permitted to encourage this. "Overseeing the case" happens if the crime elements are not fully believed during the investigation stage or when the evidence is not strong enough to consider the defendant as probably guilty. There are no statistics on how often case dismissal occurs. 7. Convictions without a trial No one can be convicted and thereby deprived of life, liberty, or rights without a proper trial before established courts (Constitution, Article 14, Second Paragraph). Thus every conviction is the result of a trial where all of the essential requirements of law are met. Mexico does not have a system of plea negotiations (such as in the United States of America and other places) where a defendant can agree to plead guilty in exchange for some considerations from the state, such as a reduced charge or a more lenient sentence. That is, defendants can not convict themselves by pleading guilty. They all must go through a trial to be convicted. Nevertheless, negotiation between defendants and the state regarding the final outcome of the case happens in certain cases. Defendants in organized crime can obtain certain benefits by agreeing to collaborate with the government. According to Article 35 from the Federal Law against Organized Crime, benefits from collaboration depend upon the phase of the penal procedure and upon collaboration proving to be effective during the investigation, prosecution, or sentence of other members of the criminal organization. If there is no initial investigation against an informant, evidence brought to the case is not used against him for this unique occasion. If there is an initial investigation issued against an informant, the final penalty can be reduced by two-thirds. If during the penal procedure the defendant agrees to collaborate, bringing evidence against other members who perform duties related to administration, direction or supervision for the criminal organization, the penalty can be reduced in half. If already sentenced and the defendant brings evidence against other members who perform duties related to administration, direction or supervision of the criminal organization, the penalty can be reduced by two- thirds. There are no statistics on how often this happens. 8. Trial Trials are public judicial proceedings that depend mainly upon written evidence. One judge presides over the trial. The Public Ministry presents a case before the court. Based on questions by the Public Ministry and the defense, witnesses testify orally and can be confronted when contradictions are raised. During trial, the Public Ministry and the defense attorney are equal in asking questions or making motions. It is legally mandatory for every person who knows facts to testify. Witnesses (unless they are the Federation's higher officials) must answer questions orally from the Public Ministry, the defendant, the defense attorney, the victim, and the judge. There are four overall stages of the criminal procedure with six tasks (figure and legend below). a) b) c) d) /----/--/------------/------------/------/ 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) a) Preliminary phase. From bringing the case before a judge to Constitutional Term decision. b) Examination phase. When penal procedure continues this is the starting phase. Evidence is brought before the judge. c) First stage sentence. When a conclusion is reached the judge dictates the sentence. d) Second stage sentence. If the first stage sentence is appealed a new appeal procedure takes place and a second stage sentence is dictated by an appellate judge. 1) Initial investigation. 2) Case brought before a judge. 3) Constitutional term decision, when charges stand or there is not enough evidence to open trial against the accused. 4) Conclusions. Parties bring conclusions. 5) Sentence on first stage. 6) Sentence on second stage if there is an appeal. B. Trial Outcomes Data provided covers the entire country (tables 16 and 17). The data represent criminal charges ending with a decision. Since a single person can be convicted and sentenced for several crimes, the numbers do not represent the number of defendants or the number of cases. Rather they represent the number of convictions for which sentences were imposed. 9. Sentencing and Penology During the trial based upon all the evidence the judge is free to establish the degree of penal criminal responsibility. The penalty is limited between a minimum and a maximum provided by law for every specific crime. To individualize the penalty, the judge must consider the following: * the external circumstances and particular criminal record;/7 * the seriousness of the offense degree and the defendant's involvement when committing the crime; * damages or the degree of danger; * the nature of the crime and the means employed to execute it; * the time, manner, place and circumstances under which it was executed; * the victim's characteristics; * the offender's age, educational level, social, cultural and economic conditions, crime motivations or pertaining to a specific ethnic or indigenous group; * the offender's subsequent behavior after committing the crime, and many special or personal conditions while committing crime. Mexican penal law allows for suspended sentences with probation under the following circumstances: * the penalty is no longer than 4 years; * the offender has good behavior after and before committing crime and has not been convicted for an aggravated crime; * the offender has an honest source of living; * because of the nature of the crime as well as the offender's personal nature, his manners and motivation, it is assumed he/she would not commit a crime; * the offender posts a bail to guarantee his/her appearance before the authorities; * the offender agrees to quit drinking alcohol or taking drugs, except under medical supervision * the offender agrees to restore damages. Probation suspends penalties and fines. The judge may consider and resolve other penalties individually based on previous circumstances. In 1999 probation was granted in 66 cases in the Federal District (Mexico City) according to the Patronato para Reincorporación Social por el Empleo en el Distrito Federal (see Interior Secretariat web page). D. Penalty. Mexican law provides these penalties: * prison; * treatment under free conditions; * confinement; * social community works; * prohibition to attend a specific place; * seizure of crime products, tools, or means; * warning; * suspension or deprivation of rights; * suspension, deprivation, or termination of a job; * a special printing of the sentence;/8 * dissolution of a firm/company; * forfeiture of illegal assets. E. Death Penalty Mexico has not abolished the death penalty. It may be applied under the following circumstances: against traitors during war; in cases of parricide, aggravated murder, intentional arson, abduction, road assault; and in cases of pirates and military officials convicted of serious crimes. As a practical matter, Mexico no longer administers the death penalty. The last time it was applied was in 1937. 10. Appeals A. Case proportion on appeals See Section VIII. JUDICIAL POWER. B,C. Grounds for appeals. Appeal is intended to resolve discrepancies caused by a judicial resolution based on an incorrect application of sentencing rules, violations of law, principles of presenting evidence, facts, or a misjudgment. The Public Ministry and its auxiliaries, and the defendant and his/her legal representative duly recognized by a first circuit judge acting as the Public Ministry auxiliary have the right to appeal. 11. Early Release and Conditional Sentence. A,B,C. System, description and precedent. There are two ways to suspend a sentence to prison: early release and release on probation. When pronouncing sentence the judge is entitled to suspend, sanction, or grant conditional sentence if the following conditions occur: a) the penalty is no longer than 4 years; b) the offender has not been previously sentenced for aggravated felony; c) strong evidence exists of the offender's good behavior, before and after committing crime; d) the offender's personal background with an honest way of living and also by the nature, mode and crime motifs it is presumed the offender will not transgress again; e) the offender guarantees that he/she will comply with measures intended to assure his/her appearance before the authorities every time it is requested; f) offender has a permanent address, and is not allowed to move unless authority grants permission; g) offender holds a legal profession or job during the sentence; h) offender abstains from alcohol and drug use unless with a medical prescription; i) offender guarantees to restore damages. Early release is granted when the prisoner has served three-fifths of his/her sentence in cases of intentional crimes, and when half the sentence has been served in cases of imprudent crimes. Also, the following requirements must be met: a) good behavior during the sentence; and b) restoration of damages or the promise to restore them. Once early release is granted the person must obey certain rules. He/she must do the following: have a permanent address; inform the authorities of any changes; have a legal job or profession; abstain from alcohol or drug use (unless under medical prescription); and submit to all supervision and orientation measures. D,E. Early Release and Conditional Sentence. For 1996 the Patronato para la Reincorporacion Social por el Empleo en el Distrito Federal reported 66 cases on conditional sentence and 37 with early release. (Secretaria de Gobernacion web page ). Section V. POLICE 1. Internal Organization A,B. Administrative Structure and Chain of Command. In Mexico the most important police corporations are the Ministerial Police (constitutionally recognized in Article 21, First Paragraph) and the Federal Preventive Police (Policía Federal Preventiva, PFP, created in 1999). Also, every State has a preventive police force and a ministerial police force (called "judicial police" in some cases). Many municipalities have preventive police. In addition there are numerous inspectors' groups performing police tasks. A problem affecting police activities is the absence of provisions in the Constitution for the various forces other than the Ministerial Police. The Federal Preventive Police is organically structured as follows: Commissioner High Command Operations Center Plans and operations Information and links Analysis Citizen's collaboration Intelligence co-ordination to prevention Federal Forces co-ordination Regional Security co-ordination Training Institute Source: Federal Preventive Police . Formerly attached to the Interior Secretariat, the Federal Preventive Policeis attached to the newly created Secretaria de Seguridad Publica. The Federal Judicial Police (Policía Judicial Federal, PJF), the Public Ministry's federation auxiliary police, is attached to the Attorney General Office through the Direccion General de Planeacion y Operación de la Policía Judicial Federal with a direct link to Subprocuraduria General de Coordinacion y Desarrollo. 2. Annual Budget The Federal Preventive Police budget, assigned during 2000, was 3.1 million pesos. Federal District Public Security Secretariat, whose main purpose is to administer the Mexico City police force, had an annual budget of 10.0 million pesos during 2000. 3. Police Force The Federal Preventive Police was created with 1,500 members from the Policia Fiscal Federal. In addition there were 600 members from the Centro de Investigacion y Seguridad Nacional plus another 4,000 from the Policia Federal de Caminos. The Defense Secretariat introduced 4,899 military police members attached to the 3rd Military Police Brigade. According to its web page there are 12,350 members. The Attorney General's office reported that 4,109 judicial police members were attached to it during 2000. The Federal District Attorney General's Office reported that 3,400 judicial police agents were attached to it during 1996. The Federal District Public Security Secretariat reported in 2000: 33,955 preventive police members, 40,000 auxiliary police, 15,000 bank and industrial police and 17,320 in other specialized groups. Sergio Aguayo mentions in El Almanaque Mexicano for the country a figure of about 223,000 preventive police officers and 24,069 for judicial police officers. As of November 2001 the Secretary of Public Security reported the following number of law enforcement and security personnel in Mexico totaling 325,816 as follows: Type of police officers Number Percent Preventive police 286,317 87% Local judicial police 26,185 9 Federal roads patrol 5,470 2 Support Federal forces 4,400 1 Federal judicial police 3,444 1 4. Entry Requirements To join the Federal Preventive Police a person must meet the following qualifications: * be a Mexican citizen in full use of political and civil rights; * be at least 18 years old; * have fully completed military service * have high school studies; * have relevant good behavior; * have never been convicted of an intentional crime and have no trial pending * have no use of illegal drugs nor alcoholism; * have no suspension or termination as a public official; and * must fully comply with examinations. 5. Initial and Permanent Training The Federal Preventive Police conduct a Police Training Center to form and train its members. Its curriculum focuses on a Basic Substantive Training Plan with the following modules: technical, special operations, legal, and management. The training center has a program, the Curricular Professional Level Formation Plan, that consists of 1 year of courses and 1 year of practical training. The curriculum is 2,313 hours with the following courses: management, legal police rules, ethics, communication, social sciences, physical fitness, technical and technological police training, intelligence, security. It is divided into: police organization; judicial and administrative police, crime prevention and control; protection, investigation and information; communication and citizen relations. There are also lectures and other practical training. 6. Initial Salary No available information 7. Accountability The Federal Preventive Police has internal regulation, with disciplinary measures that classify transgressions and apply sanctions, including removal, suspension, or dismissal. To enforce police internal rules, a collegiate organ, headed by the Internal Affairs General coordinator, decides whether there is responsibility or not. The Attorney General's Office according to its internal regulations provides three offices to control its members (the Public Ministry and the Judicial Police). The three offices are: the Responsibility Control Center, the General Visitation and the Internal Accountability. The first office is in charge of testing the institution's public officials adherence to legality, professionalism, efficiency, honesty, loyalty, righteousness, and impartiality. The second two offices are responsible for evaluation and inner control of public officials. Human rights commissions and several non- governmental organizations serve, in a general way, as external control offices. 8. Legal Authority Regarding the ministerial or judicial police, the Constitution's Article 21, First paragraph establishes its authority. This is complemented by the law of criminal procedure and by the Attorney General's internal rules. Constitutionally, the preventive police forces are mentioned in Article 21, Fifth paragraph, that addresses the general principles to conduct police institutions: legality, efficiency, professionalism, and honesty. The referenced article fails to describe police duties. Legally, the Federal preventive police are supported by a legal decree issued in January 1999. The State police forces rest on their own Public Security Law and municipal forces on public security legal regulations. 9. Relation to Armed Forces The Federal preventive police were established with civil and military personnel from the 3rd Military Police Brigade, as part of an agreement with the Armed Forces Secretariat. States and municipalities normally appoint military members, both active or those with special permission to act in civil activities, as head of the local preventive police forces. 10. Police Unions. There are no police unions in Mexico. 11. Technological Infrastructure A. Identification Systems With the 1995 creation of the National System on Public Security a number of national record systems (databases) related to crime and justice were created. Those systems were designed to track the number of members in the public security field, how many weapons they have, and how much equipment they use. Also, these record systems provide public security statistics and share information with every state on criminals who have been charged, indicted, processed, and sentenced. However, this information is regarded as confidential and it is not available for public purposes. Mexico lacks a record system of positive identification of offenders, such as a fingerprint or biometric system to identify people. There is no national fingerprint file, such as the one operated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States. Nor is there a national record system with photographs of offenders. No plan to inaugurate such an identification system for criminals currently exists. During periodic meetings of the country's attorney generals, announcements are made pointing to work on an initial fingerprint database. B. Vehicles. The Federal District Public Security Secretariat has data regarding its equipment in Mexico City between 1988 and 1999 (tables 18 and 19). C. Weapons No available data. D. Surveillance equipment. Constitutionally the police are not entitled to conduct surveillance tasks for crime investigation. The Public Ministry with authorization from a judge is entitled to perform surveillance. E,F. Radios and Computers. All police institutions in Mexico have radios and use computers at least for administrative tasks. No data available. 12. Police Special Programs Special programs, created by national police institutions, develop immediate reaction task forces to address specific crimes, such as kidnaping. Section VI. PUBLIC MINISTRY 1. Administrative Organization According to the law on criminal matters, there are three Public Ministry institutions: a) the federal, for federal crimes throughout the country; b) the local, common or state, for local or state crimes limited to the state where a crime has been committed; and c) the military, limited to military matters. The Attorney General's Office is composed by the following: Attorney General, head of the institution * Five Deputy Attorney General's Offices: * development and general co-ordination * juridical and international affairs * penal proceedings "A," "B," or "C" * Special Prosecutors: * specialists on electoral crimes * specialists on drug related crimes * general management * general visitation * internal accountability * special organized crime unit * general directions * assets forfeiture administration * legal international affairs * audit * social communication * constitutional and juridical documentation * penal proceedings control "A," "B," "C" * expertise services co-ordination * intergovernmental co-ordination * Federal judicial police planning and operations * information and telecommunications * inspector * specialized public ministry "A,""B," "C" * penal regulations * ministerial police and expert personnel control and organization * crime prevention and community services * budget, program and organization * human rights protection * human resources * material resources and general services * aircraft services * control and supervision * general visitation * delegations * training institute * international offices B. Private Prosecutors There are no private prosecutors. 2. Annual Budget Attorney General Budget for year 2000: 4.88 billion pesos. Budget for year 2001: 5.59 billion pesos. Mexico City Attorney General Budget for year 2000: 3.20 billion pesos. 3. Personnel Attorney General: 1,561 Public Ministry agents. Mexico City Attorney General: 1,085 Public Ministry agents. 4,5. Eligibility and Initial Training To become a Public Ministry agent for the Attorney General's Office applicants must have an initial 3 month's course and comply with the following: * Mexican citizenship; * college degree and official license as a lawyer; * relevant good behavior; * no convictions for intentional or aggravated felony nor pending trial; * no suspension or dismissal as a public official; * military service fully completed; * no use of illegal drugs nor alcoholism; * good physical and mental health; * driving experience; * willingness to change address; * successfully passing the following tests: medical, physical aptitudes, psychological, social environment, toxicological, and polygraph. 6. Salary Attorney General's Office Three levels for Public Ministry agent. Public Ministry assistant agent: 13,000 pesos Public Ministry associate agent: 14,600 pesos Public Ministry agent: 16,400 pesos 7. Accountability According to the internal regulations for investigation of allegations of misconduct by law enforcement personnel of the Attorney General's Office, there are three different offices: the Trust Control Center (TCC), General Visitation, and Internal Accountability. The main task of TCC is to ensure that all public officials comply with the principles of legality, professionalism, efficiency, honesty, loyalty, and impartiality. These principles are institutionally established. The other two offices are responsible for the evaluation and inner control of public officials. Human rights commissions and non governmental organizations (NGOs)act as external control organizations. 8. The Public Ministry Discretion The Public Ministry is fully entitled to conduct investigations, gather evidence, and prosecute a penal action in front of a jurisdictional judge, or to withdraw the case. The Public Ministry juridically decides from analysis of all the known facts if an offense has been committed and establishes the "probable responsibility" of a person or persons for the crime. The phrase "probable responsibility" refers to the requirement in Mexican Law that a certain level of proof must be met before a case can be brought to trial. It is similar to "probable cause" in American law but not fully equivalent. 9. Technology The offices of the Federal Attorney General and the Federal District Attorney rely on computer equipment to perform part of their tasks. Some other local attorneys' offices still use mechanical typewriting machines. Section VII. DEFENSE COUNSEL Once a defendant has been charged, he or she has the right to request and be assisted by a defender (Constitution, Article 20. Section IX). This can be done by a private lawyer. If the defendant is not represented, the State appoints a public defender. This is provided for by the federal law regarding the Public Defender in federal jurisdiction and by the Federal District Defender's Law for the local jurisdiction. 1. Administrative Organization At the federal level, the public defenders are attached to the Public Defenders' Federal Institute, a technical and operational office independent of the federal courts. At the State level, particularly in Mexico City, public defenders are part of the Legal Services General Office. In Mexico City they are attached to the Federal District government's Advisory and Legal Services office. 2. Annual Budget No information available 3. Initial Salary According to the Public Defender's Law for the Federal District (Article 15, third paragraph) the public defenders' salary in Mexico City shall be equal to that of Public Ministry agents. 4. Accountability In the Federal jurisdiction the General Director for the Public Defenders Federal Institute receives allegations and investigates misconduct by public defenders. Proceedings to determine responsibility are regulated by the Judicial Power Organic Law and the Federal Judicature Counsel. Section VIII. JUDICIAL POWER There is a Federation judiciary with a judicial system for federal jurisdictional matters and 33 State judiciaries and judicial systems, with 32 justice courts for States and one justice court for Mexico City (the Federal District). From a jurisdictional point of view, Mexico treats Mexico City (the Federal District) the way the United States of America treats Washington, D.C. (the District of Columbia). Although it is called the "Federal District" it is separate from the Federation judicial system and may be thought of as another State system. The Superior Courts of Justice, the highest state courts, have sought an integrated law enforcement system suitable for current judicial challenges. Having addressed the issue at 24 national conventions, among their main proposals are the following: to create state courts of last resort, and to provide more federal funds to all superior courts to increase salaries, dignify work, and provide equipment. In March 2001, a Technical and Academic Collaboration Agreement between Spain's judiciary and Mexico's Supreme Court of Justice National Commission was signed. The main purposes are: to design and disseminate college and research programs; to create specific training and updating courses; to promote academic exchange; and to facilitate high technology use for teleconference events. The Federation's Judicial Power gained independence from the executive and legislative powers, due mainly to constitutional reforms that consider it as the highest constitutional court. In order to achieve quality, timeliness, and quick access to justice, the Federation's judiciary also has sought budgetary independence from the Executive and Legislative Powers. During the last few years the Federation's Judicial Power has balanced power in Mexico by working for internal efficiency and external impartiality. 1. Administrative organization Judicial power is exercised by the Supreme Court of Justice, the Electoral Court, the Circuit Unitary and Collegiate courts, the District courts, and the Federal Judicature Council./9 The highest ranking court in Mexico, the Supreme Court is made up of 11 members who act in full court or in panels./10 Each panel is composed of five judges (ministers). One panel is devoted to civil and penal matters; the other to administrative and labor. The court's main task is to rule and interpret constitutionality; final resolution is always mandatory. The full court is empowered to elect: its president, who serves 4 years, a general agreements secretary, and a general agreements undersecretary. It is supported by agreements auxiliary secretaries, research and accounting secretaries, and actuaries. The Electoral Court consists of a president, a superior panel formed by seven magistrates, and five regional panels, composed of three electoral magistrates each. One magistrate serves as president. The regional sections are the Federal District; Guadalajara, Jalisco; Monterrey, Nuevo Leon; Xalapa, Veracruz; and Toluca, State of Mexico. The Supreme Court of Justice and the Electoral Court are authorized to do the following: to organize and administer, to impose disciplinary measures, to plan and spend an annual budget. The Electoral Court maintains independence from the Supreme Court of Justice, (as do the circuit and district courts). This is due to the close relation between electoral and political matters where federal courts traditionally have no jurisdiction. (For electoral matters the Supreme Court is empowered to challenge non-constitutional actions on electoral laws). The Federal Judicature Council, with a similar degree of independence as the Electoral Court, has administrative authority for discipline, accountability, and the Judicial Power civil service./12 Composed of seven counselors, the Federal Judicature Council acts both in full court or special committees. Mexico's federal court jurisdiction is divided into 27 judicial circuits. Within these are two appellate courts, collegiate and unitary circuit courts, and district courts. Three magistrates constitute every collegiate circuit court. One magistrate, acting as president, is supported by an agreements secretary and project secretaries. A magistrate, secretaries, and actuaries compose every circuit unitary court. A judge, agreement and project secretaries compose the district courts./11 The collegiate and unitary circuit courts are equal in rank. The collegiate courts have cognizance of second appeal protection proceedings, the amparo lawsuits. Amparo, which encompasses habeas corpus, injunction, error, mandamus, and certiori, consists of five types of cases: defense of civil rights; defense against unconstitutional laws; examination of the legality of judicial decisions; examination of the legality of administrative decisions; protection of agrarian communal land rights. Unitary courts have cognizance of second appeal of federal trials. District courts have cognizance of first appeal on protection proceedings and in federal trials. The circuit collegiate and unitary courts, and district courts are distributed in 27 judicial circuits as follows: First Circuit (Federal District) 44 special collegiate courts (6 on penal matters) 6 special unitary courts (4 on penal matters) 40 special district courts (9 on penal federal proceedings, 6 on protection proceedings penal matters). Second Circuit (Mexico's State) 10 special collegiate courts (2 on penal matters) unitary Courts 13 district courts (3 special for federal penal proceedings, 6 combined) Third Circuit (Colima and Jalisco) 10 special collegiate courts (2 on penal matters) Unitary Courts 18 District Courts (9 on penal matters) Fourth Circuit (Nuevo Leon) 8 Special Collegiate Courts (1 on penal matters) 2 Unitary Courts 7 District Courts Fifth Circuit (Sonora, with the exception of San Luis Rio Colorado municipality) 3 Collegiate Courts 4 Unitary Courts 10 District Courts Sixth Circuit (Puebla and Tlaxcala) 10 Collegiate Courts (2 on penal matters) Unitary Court 8 District Courts Seventh Circuit (Veracruz, with the exception of Acayucan, Agua Dulce, Coatzacoalcos, Cosoleacaque, Chinameca, Hidalgotitlan, Ixhuatlan del Sureste, Jaltipan, Jesus Carranza, Las Choapas, Mecayan, Minatitlan, Molocan, Nanchitla de Lazaro Cardenas del Rio, Oluta, Oteapan, Pajapan, San Juan Evangelista, Sayula de Aleman, Soconusco, Soteapan, Tetahuicapan de Juarez, Texistepec, Uxpanapa and Zaragoza municipalities). 7 Special Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 8 District Courts Eighth Circuit (Coahuila and the following municipalities General Simon Bolivar, Gomez Palacio, Lerdo, Mapimi, Nazas, San Juan de Guadalupe, San Luis del Cordero, San Pedro del Gallo and Tlahualito on Durango state) 3 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Ninth Circuit (San Luis Potosi) 2 Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 4 District Courts Tenth Circuit (Tabasco and the following municipalities Acayucan, Agua Dulce, Coatzacoalcos, Cosoleacaque, Chinameca, Hidalgotitlan, Ixhuatlan del Sureste, Jaltipan, Jesus Carranza, Las Choapas, Mecayan, Minatitlan, Molocan, Nanchitla de Lazaro Cardenas del Rio, Oluta, Oteapan, Pajapan, San Juan Evangelista, Sayula de Aleman, Soconusco, Soteapan, Tetahuicapan de Juarez, Texistepec, Uxpanapa and Zaragoza on Veracruz state). 3 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 5 District Courts Eleventh Circuit (Michoacan) 3 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 7 District Courts Twelfth Circuit (Sinaloa) 5 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 10 District Courts Thirteenth Circuit (Oaxaca) 3 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Fourteenth Circuit (Campeche and Yucatan) 3 Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 6 District Courts Fifteenth Circuit (Baja California and Sonora's San Luis Rio Colorado municipality) 3 Collegiate Courts 5 Unitary Courts 12 District Courts Sixteenth Circuit (Guanajuato) 4 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Seventeenth Circuit (Chihuahua) 3 Collegiate Courts 3 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Eighteenth Circuit (Morelos) 2 Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 4 District Courts Nineteenth Circuit (Tamaulipas) 4 Collegiate Courts 4 Unitary Courts 11 District Courts Twentieth Circuit (Chiapas) 3 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Twenty-first Circuit (Guerrero) 4 Collegiate Courts 2 Unitary Courts 6 District Courts Twenty-second Circuit (Hidalgo and Queretaro) 2 Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 4 District Courts Twenty-third Circuit (Aguascalientes and Zacatecas) 3 Collegiate Courts 1 Unitary Court 5 District Courts Twenty-fourth Circuit (Nayarit) 1 Collegiate Court 1 Unitary Court 2 District Courts Twenty-fifth Circuit (Durango with the exception of General Simon Bolivar, Gomez Palacio, Lerdo, Mapimi, Nazas, San Juan de Guadalupe, San Luis del Cordero, San Pedro del Gallo and Tlahualito municipalities). 1 Collegiate Court 1 Unitary Court 3 District Courts Twenty-sixth Circuit (Baja California Sur) 1 Collegiate Court 1 Unitary Court 2 District Courts Twenty-seventh Circuit (Quintana Roo) 1 Collegiate Court 1 Unitary Court 3 District Courts/13 2. For the Judicial Power (the Supreme Court of Justice, the Electoral Court, the circuit unitary and collegiate courts, the district courts and Federal Judicature Council) during 2001, Congress approved a budget of 13.8 billion pesos./14 This represents 1% of federal public spending./15 Five- sixth parts were used in wages, salaries, and benefits. Data on public spending have been available since 1933. To calculate public spending per capita for justice matters one must know the combined budget totals of the federal judiciary, the State (local) courts, and the Federal District courts. This would give a very accurate figure. Since it has been impossible to gather all data regarding local courts, the per capita figure is not provided. 3. Personnel There are approximately 27,000 employees in the Federation's judicial system./16 The Federal Judicature Council calculated the budget for 2001 based upon 25,720 persons. Of those 23,191 were already on payroll, and 2,529 new employees were to be distributed as follows: 1,347 for new jurisdictional bodies; 805 to enhance jurisdictional bodies operations; 377 positions to support administrative areas; and 147 for the Public Defenders Federal Institute. (The Council does not include Supreme Court or Electoral Court positions)./17 4. Entry requirements for Judges, Magistrates, and Ministers. To be elected as Mexico's Supreme Court Minister of Justice the candidate must have the following qualifications: Mexican born citizen; have full political and civil rights; at least 35 years old; 10 years of professional practice; attorney at law license; good reputation; never been convicted and sentenced to serve in prison for more than 1 year, or convicted of robbery, fraud, counterfeit, abuse of confidence or another crime that seriously harmed their public image. Also persons with efficiency, capacity, integrity on justice grounds or distinguished by probity, competence, and professional background during juridical activity are preferred./18 Ministers are elected for a 15- year term (except for permanent physical or mental impairment)./19 To appoint Supreme Court ministers, the President submits a list of candidates to the Senate, which, in a 30-day period, appoints the justices by two- thirds vote from Senate members. If the Senate fails to appoint, the President can re-nominate candidates. If the Senate rejects the candidates' list, a new one is submitted. In case of a second list rejection, the President is entitled to appoint his choice./20 For appointment, a circuit court collegiate or unitary magistrate must have the following qualifications: Mexican born citizen with no other citizenship; having full civil rights; more than 35 years old; no convictions for aggravated felony with a prison sentence of more than 1 year; attorney at law license; and at least 5 years of professional practice. Circuit court magistrates serve 6-year terms. After that period they may be ratified, and only leave the post due to a violation of the statutory provisions for administrative responsibility, or at 65 years old, the compulsory retirement age./21 The same requirements exist for appointment as district court judge with the exception of age -- they must be more than 30 years old. After serving a 6-year term, district judges also may be automatically ratified, and only removed for violation of administrative responsibility, or having reached age 65./22 Circuit court magistrates and district court judges are appointed and designated by the Federal Judicature Council due to its entitlement to promote judicial civil service./23 Entry and promotion is through internal and open competition./24 Internal competition for a circuit court magistrate post is limited to district court judges. The Agreements Secretary General from the Supreme Court of Justice, Studies and Account Minister secretary, Full Court Agreements secretary, Full Court Agreements undersecretary, Circuit Court secretary and District Court judge secretary, can compete for district court judge posts. The internal contest procedures for both posts are the same. The Federal Judicature Council posts an official public call in the Federation's official journal and some national newspapers. Notices state whether the contest is internal or open opposition, the level and number of vacancies, and the dates for the application submission and examinations. This process is administered by the Federal Judicature Institute. Applicants must first answer a questionnaire on matters related to their duties. The five best finalists are chosen to give written responses to practical cases, followed by oral and public examination. Each person's performance, academic degree, and training in the Federal Judicature Institute is also considered. The jury is composed of members of the Federal Judicature Council, circuit court or district court ratified magistrates and judges, and a member of the Institute's Academic Committee./25 5. Training An auxiliary of the Federal Judicature Council, the Federal Judicature Institute investigates, trains, and provides continuing education for the federal judiciary, or those who aspire to join it./26 It also offers basic courses to prepare and train federal judicial power actuaries, district court judge's secretaries, unitary and collegiate court secretaries, and the Supreme Court's studies and account secretaries. During 2000 at the Institute's central and 16 branch offices, 2,245 persons attended basic courses: 742 were in actuary courses; 725 took court secretary courses; and 778 enrolled in tribunal secretary courses. (Courses are offered annually, in two periods). Also during 2000, a 10- hour course on basic didacticism was given for 181 professors. The Judicial Specialization Course, designed to produce judges, covers all matters that a federal judge should know in a year. During 2000, of the 579 students who matriculated (in 4 groups), 570 finished the course. 146 trained at the central offices and 433 at the Institute's 16 branches. The Federal Judicature Institute established guidelines and organized special courses on constitutional law and protection proceedings. They also created a long distance education project. Courses, seminars, lectures, round tables, and workshops are held on specific juridical matters at all Institute sites./27 6. Salaries From the official agreement that authorizes publication of the salaries and benefits of the public servants of the Federal Judicial Power, published in the Federation's official journal on February 28, 2001, data were obtained (table 20). 7. Accountability Supreme Court Ministers and Federal Judicature Council members are removed or disqualified from holding public office if they commit acts or omissions against the basic public interest. To impose a penalty, the House of Representatives must read the substance of the charge in a hearing, then prosecute the accusation before the Senate. Ministers and counselors are invested with federal impediment prerogatives to begin a penal procedure while they are on duty. The House of Representatives can initiate proceedings against an indicted person while on duty, whether the indictment continues after the defendant's public function ends. The same process occurs for magistrates from state justice courts and local judicature counselors. In those cases the Federal Cameras' resolutions are declarative; the local legislatures resolve the proceedings./28 Regarding misconduct among the Federation's other judicial officials, the Supreme Court, acting as a full court, has jurisdiction to investigate misconduct by ministers and their public officials. For serious misconduct by circuit court magistrates or district court judges, the Federal Judicature Council's full court is empowered to apply penalties such as removal, or temporary disqualification to hold an office or commission in public organizations./29 The Federation's Judicial Accountability Office investigates allegations of misconduct by its public officials and employees./30 Emerging from a new internal government model for the Federation's Judicial Power, the Federal Judicature Council was created in 1995. The Council's creation freed the Supreme Court of Justice from administrative tasks. The Judicature Council was empowered to maintain independence for judges and magistrates, to promote the development of judicial civil service, and administer the Judicial Power budget. The Supreme Court of Justice manages its own budget and is not subordinated to management from the Judicature Council. The Council is also charged with administration, discipline, and civil service for the Federation's Judicial Power, with the exception of the Supreme Court of Justice and the Electoral Court. Its institutional activity covers: law enforcement, support to normative and regulative judicial policies, civil service, discipline, administration, printing and information dissemination, defense and juridical advisory, and more recently regulation of debtor proceedings. Composed of seven counselors whose chairman is also Supreme Court of Justice president, the Council acts in full sections or commissions. Three counselors are Judicial Power members -- circuit court magistrates and district court judges designated by the full sections of the Supreme Court of Justice; the other three counselors are outstanding persons holding relevant juridical positions. Two are elected and designated by the Senate; and one is appointed by the President of the Republic. The Judicature Council also resolves assignation, ratification, removal of circuit court magistrates and district court judges, and decides other disciplinary measures for misconduct allegations. It establishes jurisdiction and specialization for collegiate, unitary, and district courts. The Council has technical and managerial independence and may issue opinions. To apply disciplinary measures the Council keeps a Federal Judicial Accounting office; to conduct administrative disciplinary proceedings, it has a Disciplinary Commission supported by an Executive Discipline Secretary in collaboration with the Judicial Inspector's office. The latter is the Council's auxiliary organ to survey circuit court and district court performance and to supervise their members conduct. The Disciplinary Commission is the Council's auxiliary in warning and summoning circuit court magistrates and district court judges. It hears administrative proceedings regarding administrative responsibility against jurisdictional organs, public officials, and from similar level offices. The Accounting Office supervises the Federal Judicature Council and the judicial officials to enforce the annual mandatory income report. Council members are excepted. Proceedings to determine administrative responsibilities of the Federation's judicial officials are provided in the Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 134. This article states in the instance of a complaint or misconduct allegation, a public official shall respond or introduce evidence in 5 days. Once a report is submitted and evidence presented resolution takes 30 days and the official is notified in 72 hours. For a successful investigation, temporary removal from a post can be ordered. The possible sanctions are: private or public summons; public or private warnings; economic sanctions; suspension; removal or temporary disqualification to hold a public job. The removal of judges and magistrates applies when they have committed a serious, or reiterate irresponsible conduct. Although the Council's resolutions are unappealable, removal from the post of judge and magistrate can be objected to before the full Supreme Court./31 In 2000 the Council resolved 905 cases: 455 were related to administrative complaints. Of this number 124 were deemed unsuitable, 133 baseless, and 30 with strong evidence. Of 25 allegations the findings were: one without responsibility, 22 with responsibility, and 2 unsuitable. In 53 cases administrative responsibility was concluded. In 71 cases penalties were imposed on judicial officials: 45 private and 3 public summons: 2 private and 11 public warnings; 5 suspensions; 4 removals and 1 disqualification. During the same year the Judicial Inspector conducted 409 ordinary and extraordinary inspections, as well as 22 extraordinary visits./32 Since 1995 when the Federal Judicature's Council was created, a total of 2,155 administrative complaints have been resolved. From the resolutions 287 penalties were imposed on magistrates, judges, and secretaries. Performance of district court judges and circuit court magistrates was evaluated through 1,935 inspections./33 8. Technology All judicial officials whose duties require it have use of computers. The Federal judicial system provides internet access, internal information networks, internal network systems, internet pages, and compact discs with jurisprudence, juridical, and technical information needed by the Judicial Power. It is connected to the IBEROIUS system that is linked to all judicial systems in Latin America and Spain./34 9. Specialized Indian Tribal Courts. In federal matters there are no special jurisdiction Indian courts. The Chiapas State local court has special tribunals (part 9., this section). 10. Sentences and Appeals The President's 2000 Annual Report (November 16, 1999 to November 15, 2000) gave the following statistics from the Supreme Court of Justice and the Federal Judicature Council on judicial proceedings: 17,165 protection proceedings were entered by collegiate courts, 969 by unitary courts, and 89,602 by district courts. Outcomes for the same category were: 17,924 in collegiate courts, 968 in unitary tribunals, and 88,441 in district courts. The incoming penal trials in district courts were 20,755, and there were 31,122 appeals before unitary courts. The outcomes in the same category were 22,015 in district courts and 30,608 in unitary tribunals. In the collegiate circuit courts for penal matters, there were 12,434 prior cases that were added to 30,611 new cases: 32,340 cases were resolved and there were 10,705 pending cases. In penal matters, the collegiate circuit courts heard direct protection proceedings, having 7,840 prior cases and 17,165 new: they resolved 17,924 cases and had 7,081 pending cases. The collegiate circuit tribunals handled actions to reverse sentence on protection penal matters, with 4,131 previous cases and 10,123 incoming cases: they resolved 11,286 and had 3,168 pending cases. In these cases sentences were always imposed in the first instance. Of those cases mentioned in the previous paragraph with decisions in the first instance for which a contrary to law ruling was imposed, there were 75 previous and 353 new cases; 358 were resolved and 73 cases were pending. In appeals against ancillary proceedings suspension, the collegiate tribunals had 133 previous cases and 614 new cases; 620 were resolved and 217 pending resolution. The collegiate circuit tribunals heard cases of ancillary joiner of actions before a district judge. In penal matters, they had 1 prior case, 21 new cases, resolved 16 cases and had 6 pending cases. In penal matters the collegiate tribunals heard appeals of 150 cases they had previously heard and 1,153 new cases. They resolved 1,145 cases and had 158 cases pending. With regard to appeals to reverse a judgment, there were 13 prior cases and 183 new cases: 185 were resolved and 11 were pending. Unitary tribunals heard 33,877 federal cases in penal matters; there were 2,655 previous appeal cases and 31,122 new cases. Of these 30,608 were resolved and 3,169 were pending. With regard to cases where appeals had been denied, of 3 previous cases and 94 new cases, 95 were resolved and 2 cases were pending resolution. In appeals cases, among 1 previous and 65 new cases, 64 were resolved and 2 were pending. Regarding district court protection proceedings in penal matters, there were 8,095 previous cases, 89,008 new cases, and 594 re-entries. 88,441 cases were resolved and 9,265 pending resolution. Regarding the district court's penal case there were: 10,013 previous cases, 20,755 new cases, 22,015 resolved cases, and 10,580 cases pending resolution. District courts also had data on provisional files as follows: initial investigations pending warrant orders or summons, 29,466; 5,916 extinct; 14,700 filed pending execution; 8,180 to be executed; and 30,044 pending execution. For discharged cases the numbers are: 29,356 previous cases; 5,367 dismissed; 8,784 filed; 1,073 pending execution and 31,757 pending. Superior Court of Justice for the Federal District (Mexico City) 1. Administrative Organization The Superior Court of Justice for the Federal District is composed of a chairman, nine civil sections, seven penal sections, three family sections. Each section has three magistrates, one of whom serves as chairman. The Federal District has 62 civil courts, 66 penal courts, 40 family courts, 21 realty rental courts, a combined court of first instance for Islas Marias correctional facilities, 28 peace courts in civil matters, and 40 peace courts on penal matters. The difference between the first instance and the peace courts is that the peace courts resolve petty offenses. The number of courts that have been established is based upon the caseloads for each type of matter. The Superior Court also is responsible for a Judicial Files office, the Jurisprudence Annals, the Judicial Bulletin, the Civil Consignment office, Social Work unit, a library, the Judicial Studies Institute and a General Management office. The Superior Court of Justice also has a Judicature Council for the Federal District composed of six counselors (one first instance judge, one peace judge, two Federal Legislative Assembly appointees, one Federal District government appointee, and one appointee of the Superior Court's chairman)./35 2. Annual Budget and Expenses. In 2000 the Superior Court of Justice for the Federal District had a budget of 1.45 billion pesos. From 1995 to 1999 the Superior Court of Justice and the Judicature Council received allotments of budgetary resources that mainly increased (tables 21 and 22)./36 3. Personnel According to the 1999 payroll there were 8,152 persons employed. Of these 1,241 were structural personnel and 6,911 administrative personnel. Each civil and family section magistrate has four projects clerks. Penal section magistrates have five. There is also a clerk assigned to support three other magistrates in charge of emergencies. Auxiliary clerks, law interns, and administrative personnel support all sections. The first instance and peace courts have four project clerks and support personnel, besides additional clerks including court officers to hasten court procedures. The Judicature Council has 138 positions (104 technical operatives and 34 officials)./37 4. Requirements for Judges, Magistrates, and Ministers To serve as Superior Court of Justice magistrate a person must comply with the same requirements as Supreme Court Minister. A distinguished professional accomplishment in the Federal District's judicial field is preferred. The Chief of the Federal District Chief Government submits nominations to the Legislative Assembly for appointment of individuals. Magistrates hold office for 6 years and may be ratified by the Assembly. They can not be removed from their post unless they commit serious misconduct. The Judicature's Council has seven members: the Chairman of the Superior Court of Justice, who also heads the Council; three members elected by ballot, one magistrate, one first instance judge, and one peace judge; one appointee of the Chief of the government; and two appointees of the Legislative Assembly. Counselors must meet the requirements for magistrates. They hold office for 5 years and may not be re-elected./38 The first instance and peace judges are appointed for 6 years and may repeat a similar term with the Judicature Council's approval. To be appointed as magistrate, candidates must be Mexican born citizens with no other nationality; having full civil and political rights; be at least 35 years old; have 10 years of legal practice; possess an attorney at law license; be of good behavior; have no convictions for an intentional crime with more than a 1 year sentence; have resided in the country for at least 2 years before appointment; have not held any of the following offices in the preceding year: Federal District governor, Secretary, Attorney General or Legislative Assembly deputy. In case of robbery, fraud, counterfeit, or other serious crime, he/she shall be removed. To be appointed as a first instance judge the requirements are similar to the ones stated above. The candidate must have a minimum of 5 years legal practice, obtain a favorable result in an opposition contest, and meet the other remaining elements./39 5. Training The Judicial Studies Institute of the Superior Court of Justice for the Federal District is in charge of preparation, training, and updating personnel and candidates for the judicial civil service. They conduct the opposition exams for judges' posts and support the Two Party Commission on selecting candidates for judicial service posts. With support from the Public Security National Academy during August 2000, the Institute joined the satellite Long Distance Education Program. Addressing justice superior courts throughout the country, its goal was to contribute to the training and professional development of judicial personnel while in service./40 Between 1995 and 1999 the Institute conducted 80 opposition exams for first instance and peace court posts. It also presented lectures and information events; an annual course almost 900 hours long to judicial candidates, as well as 300 hours of classes to the Project, Proceedings, Actuary and Conciliation clerks. The Institute's enrollments were 1,050 persons; sitting magistrates (24%), first instance judges (42%), and peace judges (79%) were among those trained./41 Civil and family section magistrates each have four project clerks. Penal section magistrates have five. There is also a clerk assigned to support three other magistrates in charge of emergencies. Auxiliary clerks, law interns and administrative personnel support all sections. Courts of first instance and peace courts have four project clerks and support personnel, as well as other clerks including court officers to hasten court procedures. In 2000, the Judicial Studies Institute expected attendance of 286 people in judicial courses, 3,597 in judicial updating, 1,500 in general training, 400 in juridical information technology, and 840 in long distance education./42 6. Salaries As of December 31, 1999, the monthly salaries for judicial administrative and maintenance personnel were from $294 to $603 USD (table 23)./43 7. Accountability For discipline and oversight, the Federal Judicature Council hears complaints against counselors, magistrates, judges, and other judicial officials. It also conducts administrative visits to the sections and courts to supervise their functioning. The Superior Court of Justice magistrates, the Federal District common jurisdiction judges, and other judicial officials are responsible for failure to conduct their duties. The full Superior Court, including the chairman, magistrates, and judges, penalizes misconduct by Federal District judicial officials. Complaints against judicial officials must be written and may be brought by the following parties: parties involved in a trial; persons or organizations deprived of such recognition; the Public Ministry; family judges for trials within their jurisdiction on behalf of persons with disabilities; the lawyers association registered with the court. If a judicial officer commits five faults during his/her tenure he/she is subject to suspension./44 According to the Annual Report 1999-2000 from the Superior Court of Justice of the Federal District Chairman between December 1, 1999 and November 30, 2000, counselors made 58 inspection visits to sections; 779 to courts, with 837 written records to verify correct administrative functioning from jurisdictional units; 584 administrative proceedings to bring action; 543 complaints; 41 on its own initiative. From the counselors' first inspections, 46 cases were forwarded, and from second reviews they forwarded 33 cases. Also there were 134 written records with presumed irregular behavior, as well as 1,040 reports from 260 courts. Between 1995 and 1999 the Federal District Judicature Council determined 1,457 allegations were baseless, and submitted 343 new administrative complaints for proceedings. The Council concluded official responsibility in 243 complaints, and in 145 no responsibility. 8. Technology Between 1996 and 1999, 326 new fax machines, 1,444 computers, and 3,361 printers were obtained. By 1999 sections were equipped with 20 computers and the courts had 6 computers and additional printers. Other advances were: a program designed for the court's general supply warehouse; another for inventory to discharge goods; a microfilm sales system improvement; a computer Altos-4500 replacement for Altos-5000 to support record keeping; chairman's offices and cameras and monitors for confrontation procedures which in penal law is used to avoid the emotional consequences for victims./45 With the technology advances, an average of 840 cases per day were received in the courts./46 A Federal District Superior Court of Justice Office of Judicial Statistics report for December 1999 to November 2000 indicates that first instance courts ruled on penal matters as follows: 807 acquittals; 7,675 sentences; 220 combined; 1,072 summonses; 3,341 arrest warrants and 1,665 warrants for re-arrest. From December 2000 to April 2001 there were the following: 383 acquittals; 2,988 convictions; 220 combined; 359 summonses; 968 arrest warrants and 500 re-arrest warrants. The same report indicates that the peace penal courts during December 1999 to November 2000 issued the following decisions: 309 acquittals; 4,358 convictions; 52 combined; 14,842 summonses; 3,797 arrest warrants; 913 warrants for re-arrest. From December 2000 to April 2001 there were 132 acquittals, 1,871 convictions, 32 combined, 5,305 summons, 1,469 arrest warrants, and 339 re-arrest orders. State of Campeche Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following information was obtained from the State of Campeche Superior Court of Justice web page, . The Court is headed by a chairman. It has three sections, civil, penal, and administrative, and a supernumerary magistrate. The state is divided into five judicial districts. The first district has three first instance judges in family matters, three in civil, and four in penal matters, as well as a low-level judge. There are also three auxiliary judges for civil and family matters. The second district has first instance judges for family matters, two for civil, and three for penal matters, as well as a low- level judge. The third and fourth districts have a combined first instance court judge for civil and family matters and a low-level judge. The fifth district has a first instance civil-family judge. The electoral courts, also part of the State Court, have statewide jurisdiction. First instance courts exercise jurisdiction over their district, and low-level courts over specific municipalities. A settlement judge holds jurisdiction in all five districts. 2. Annual Budget and Expenditures The 1999 budget was increased to $6.2 million USD. From January 1 to August 31, 1999 it was applied as follows: Salaries 2,256,443 Supplies 246,566 Services 700,055 Transfers 8,494 Real estate and furniture 115,057 3. Personnel 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements Opposition contests were implemented to fill vacant posts. During 1999, there were 9 opposition examinations to select project, auxiliary and proceedings clerks, and actuaries. A total of 57 persons took part, 41 men and 16 women. 5. Training From September 1, 1998 to August 31, 1999, court members were trained and updated in the newly created Training and Updating Center. The center also includes a civil service system for all public officials who join judicial service. It is a special means of entry, training, and updating that promotes principles of excellence, professionalism, objectivity, impartiality, and independence. Selection and opposition examinations are administered as well. During the same academic year, as part of an agreement signed with Universidad Panamericana, the Second Course on Ethical-Philosophical Basis for Jurisdictional Activities for judges and magistrates took place. Courses on ethics and service commitment for 226 judicial officials in the first and second districts were also held. To consider new civil and penal codification, permanent study workshops and these courses were organized: Actuary for State Judicial Power, Second State Encounter for Settlement Judges, writing, ethics, and professionalism for public officials willing to become judges. 6. Salaries No data available. 7. Accountability Not given. 8. Technology During 1999, acquisition of 64 computers and 54 printers was reported. Figures for previous equipment acquisitions were not available. There was also a technical information web data for judges on civil, family, penal and under age matters. Three judicial web systems operate between the first and second judicial districts with 107 computers linked to three different servers. This service is connected to 260 users to access web and local electronic mail. 9. Sentences and Appeals During 1999, the First Instance Court on Penal and Juvenile branches heard 2009 cases, consisting of 1,629 new cases added to 380 prior cases. From this figure 936 ended with sentences and 417 were dismissed. The penal section had 97 existing cases and accepted 1,400 new cases for a total of 1,497. Of these 1,218 ended with sentences and 149 were dismissed. State of Chiapas Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The Superior Court, headed by a chairman, has nine appeal sections: two civil and two penal in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, one regional and one civil regional in Tapachula, one combined for the region in San Cristobal, one Indian combined for the region in San Cristobal, and one unitary combined section in Pichucalco. The State is divided into 21 judicial districts, that are divided into 15 first instance courts for civil matters, 6 courts for family matters, 13 courts for penal matters, and 12 combined courts. Based on the San Andres Larrainzar Agreements, there are Indian peace and settlement courts in Chiapas. They use traditional tribal justice systems in association with the constitutional justice system. Civil matter disputes are submitted and resolved before a judge, who has previously heard traditional authorities and whose rulings are issued res judicata (which bars re- litigation). On penal matters, Indian court is the instance to appeal a sentence. The Indian peace and settlements courts hear the following penal matters: injuries, threats, housebreaking, libel, injurious falsehood, bigamy, robbery not exceeding 300 days of the minimum wage, abuse of confidence not exceeding 200 days of the minimum wage, damage, contempt; as well as some other offenses considered as misdemeanors usually when the party of interest agrees to settlement. Indian courts operate in 6 municipalities; installation of 12 more is planned. There are nine judicial districts with nine Indian defenders. For those who do not understand or speak Spanish, the districts have 10 translators./47 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution No data available. 3. Personnel No data available. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements Not given. 5. Training No data available. 6. Salaries No data available. 7. Accountability 8. Technology No data available. 9. Sentences and Appeals No data available. State of Guerrero Superior Court of Justice The source of the information on the Superior Court of Justice of the State of Guerrero is the Chairman of the Superior Court of Justice for the Federal District, 1999-2000 Annual Report, for May 1, 1999 to April 30, 2000. 1. Administrative Organization The Superior Court of Justice of the State of Guerrero is headed by a chairman. It has one civil section, one family section, three penal sections, one auxiliary civil section, and two supernumerary magistrates. There are 25 first instance courts for penal matters, 18 for civil matters, 8 combined and 5 for family matters, with 56 first instance judges and 79 peace judges. Acapulco's municipality has two penal courts and two civil courts. The other municipalities have combined courts for civil, penal, and family matters. Until the operation of the Judicature Council, a temporary commission, headed by the court and sections chairpersons, handled administrative business. The commission's administrative management did not include judicial appointments, ascription, ratification, or removal. 2. Annual budget and expenditures The budget for 2000 was $11.8 million USD. Of this $10.2 million went to ordinary expenditures and $1.6 million to construct new court buildings. As part of the National Program to Support Superior Courts of Justice of the Public Security National System, the Superior Court acquired a $164,293 USD increase its budget. 3. Personnel By April 2000, 1,056 public officials constituted the State's judicial body. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements 5. Training During 2000 the Superior Court of Justice through the Judicial Betterment Institute developed three training and updating courses for judges, project and settlement clerks, and judicial service candidates. All were taught by magistrates. There were 314 participants in the first course, 344 in the second and 260 in the third. Civil, penal, and family issues were discussed. 6. Salaries 7. Accountability 8. Technology The State's judicial branch reports 182 computers, distributed in court sections, first instance courts, peace courts, and administrative areas. 9. Sentences and Appeals For May 1999 to April 2000, the Superior High Court of Justice reported the following: 3,991 cases in penal sections, with 3,899 cases resolved and 209 unresolved; protection proceedings were issued, 114 granted by constitutional control and 82 cases dismissed. Of the 3,899 cases resolved, there were 2,152 agreements issued through 4,061 hearings. The penal courts received 5,105 cases: 2,541 cases were resolved and 1,440 were unresolved; protection proceedings were issued, 135 granted by constitutional control, 1,066 were dismissed. Of the 1,365 peace justice cases in penal matters, 856 cases were resolved. Of those there were: 728 dismissals and 340 requests; 98 cases brought; 128 final sentences with 98 acquittals and 30 convictions; 579 summons issued; 124 other court decisions. State of Hidalgo Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following information was obtained from the Superior Court of Justice of the State of Hidalgo chairman's report, for April 1, 2000 to March 31, 2001. This court of justice was the first to meet the requirements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) to implement a Quality Management System (control of documents and records, internal audits, control of nonconformances, corrective actions, preventive actions) and obtain a Quality Certificate ISO 9002. Also, the Superior Court heads Hidalgo's Quality Organization composed of public and private organizations devoted to promote institutional quality and development. 2. Annual budget and expenditures For 2000, the State's judicial budget increased to $7.8 million USD. Of this amount, $6.9 million was for wages and salaries (a 3% increase); $270,178 for supplies (a 7% increase); $551,650 for general services (a 0.3% increase); and $21,816 for investment expenditures. The budget for 2001-2002 was $8.6 million USD with $314,348 in Federal funds from the Public Security National System to support professional training, information systems, facilities improvement, and long distance education. 3. Personnel The court's payroll includes 13 magistrates, 42 judges, 6 section clerks, 86 settlement clerks, 62 actuaries, 537 administrative personnel, totaling 774 persons. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements Selection and promotion of judicial officials are through required contests; to comply with its formative process they rotate every 2 years. 5. Training To support performance and professional development the court has signed several agreements with local universities. One is Hidalgo's Universidad Científica Latinoamericana. The Court maintains a Training and Juridical Research Institute which develops formative, update, and specialization activities for judicial personnel. At its facilities the Public Security National Academy's satellite television education program is broadcast. Several workshops are held to unify legal criteria and analyze materials and cases from court jurisdictional issues. To analyze legislative proposals state and local forums are also organized. Through the 2000 long distance education program four courses were transmitted on topics, including the Introductory Course to Settlement, Judicial Ethics and Protection Proceedings. There were eight video conferences on topics, such as Alternative Justice Means, Victimology and Penal Process, Law Information Systems, New Protection Proceedings Law, Physical Evidence, International Penal Court. Sixty public officials attended each session, a total of 1,300 persons during the entire program. The First Seminar on Law Constitutional Proceedings was also transmitted for magistrates, judges, clerks and other public officials from the State's judicial power, district courts, Public Ministry agents, defenders and attorneys, with 200 persons attending each session. The court grants scholarships for foreign and local study. During the past year, 4 officials attend foreign courses on scholarship and another 20 studied in local universities. With financial support from the Public Security National System the institute gave a special course, a seminar, and six computer courses. Satellite programming of the 120 hour special diploma course, Service Quality on Law Enforcement, was attended by 60 persons, among them magistrates, judges and administration officials. Thirty-seven officials attended a seminar titled Complete Quality. To implement the Quality Management Systems, special courses (a total 412 hours) were organized to train administration personnel. For 45 training activities, the attendance was 180 persons. 6. Salaries No information is available on salaries, although during last year a salary increase ranging from nearly 12% and 15% benefits increase was announced. 7. Responsibility The Judicial Power Accountability General's office inspects the judiciary to receive and review allegations of misconduct, and issues discipline. Periodical inspections for administrative supervision are conducted in all judicial districts to evaluate deficiencies, delays, or missing items. Recommendations are given to amend irregular conduct. During the report period, there were 21 complaints: 4 had strong evidence, 8 were acquitted, 4 dismissed, 3 were without basis, and 2 to meet in procedure. The State also requires all employees to give an official statement of assets, to detect concealment of income and property. 8. Technology Reported numbers were 80 computers and 21 printers, and a server for the central office, representing a 42% increase in computer equipment. With support from the Public Security National System, a satellite signal was established, making Hidalgo one of the pilot states linked to an information exchange program on penal matters. New software was developed for the following areas: Finance and Administration Warehouse, inventories Office and furniture systems Accountability Office Activities control Judicial Power files Integral transfer and historic system Civil, family and penal Second stage integral sections system General Secretariat Exams system Informatics and Statistics Software and hardware Unit inventory system and statistics system Civil courts Actuaries system Judicial fund for developmentand benefits Savings and Loans systems 9. Sentences and Appeals In first instance penal sections there were rulings in 1,112 cases: 1,659 arrest warrants, 77 denied warrants, 44 summons, and 1,146 prison orders. Appeal penal sections received 816 cases, and of these 779 rulings were issued: 494 were confirmed, 196 modified, and 89 dismissed. The State statistics system reported, for the year 2000 through November 30: 2,078 cases with up to 2,325 offences; 430 guilty verdicts issued; 69 dismissals. For the same period, there were 793 penal cases in appeal. State of Jalisco Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The Superior Court of Justice of the State of Jalisco is headed by a chairman, and has nine second stage sections (three penal matters sections, five civil matters sections, and one combined), and these offices: General Proceedings and General Management, Administration, Accountability, Defenders, Social Communication, Compilation and Thesis./48 There are also 13 civil courts, 7 family courts, 10 commercial courts, 13 penal courts and 47 foreign courts. Nine are first instance in penal matters. The State is divided into 32 judicial districts with 60 lower courts and 61 peace courts. There is also a People's Jury devoted to media and public order offences. This jury is composed of seven citizens elected through a ballot system by the Judicial Power General Council. The General Council consists of six counselors and the Superior Court of Justice chairman, who serves as its head. Three counselors, proposed by parliamentary groups after designation by society, are elected as follows: one by the magistrates, one by the judges, and one by the court's secretaries. The other three are elected by the local Congress with two-thirds of the deputies' votes. This Council oversees administrative tasks, judicial service, and discipline, and establishes territorial boundaries. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution No data available. 3. Personnel No data available. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements To become a first instance judge the applicant must meet these requirements: a Mexican born citizen with full political and civil rights; between ages 27 and 65; a lawyer or attorney at law with at least 5 years of professional practice; have no conviction for aggravated felony; have a well established record of honesty and probity. For appointment as a lower court or peace court judge one must meet the following requirements: Mexican born citizen with full political and civil rights; between ages 25 and 65; have at least a junior high school level of education; have a well established record of honesty and probity; have no conviction for aggravated felony. Lower court judges hear offences that have a maximum sentence of 2 years. Hearings for offences with maximum sentences of 6 months are before peace court judges. 5. Training 6. Salaries 7. Accountability 8. Technology 9. Sentences and Appeals State of Michoacan Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization In 2000 in the Chairman's Annual Report for the State of Michoacan's Superior Court of Justice, the following data was given. The Superior Court has 16 sections, 8 for penal and 8 for civil matters, each one with a magistrate. There are also 25 penal sections and 10 combined sections with 114 municipal courts. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution 3. Personnel 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements To hold office applicants must take an opposition examination supervised by the exams commissions through open call. Essential requirements are: knowledge of law, ability to interpret, human sensibility, ability to listen, probity, and a justice sense. 5. Training 6. Salaries 7. Accountability During 2000, 73 inspections of Judicial Power courts of first instance verified performance and identified personnel needs and material resources. This program is part of the permanent inspection on ethics and probity for court personnel. With allegations of misconduct, the full section conducts an administrative investigation proceeding; if there is official responsibility, disciplinary measures are taken, including suspension and removal from post. 8. Technology The Morelos Judicial Information System delivers full access to all computer tools to the State's judicial offices. When the annual report was issued, Morelia's penal first instance courts and the Apatzingan, Uruapan, Zamora, Zitacuaro, Lazaro Cardenas, Hidalgo, and Arteaga districts had received computer equipment. A new building, to be named the "Jose Maria Morelos" Palace of Justice, is under construction. The offices will house an advanced studies Justice Center. 9. Sentences and Appeals During 1999, 7,504 new cases were entered and 7,551 cases concluded. Of the 7,551 cases resolved: 97% were with a conviction, 2.9% final orders, and 0.1% were other categories. Also, of the 7,551 cases resolved, 542 appealed for protection proceedings and in 193 cases federal protection was granted. On December 31, 1999, penal sections closed the judicial year with 548 pending cases. In 2000 in addition to pending cases, the 25 penal courts and the 10 combined courts had 12,695 new cases filed. 12,679 cases were concluded and 501 cases were pending by December 31, 2000. Of the concluded cases 54% were with sentence, 30% with final orders, and 16% were transferred to another court. State of Morelos Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization Data for the Superior Court of Justice of the State of Morelos are from the Chairman's 1996-1997 Annual Report. The Superior Court of Justice has five sections, two civil, one penal, one auxiliary, and one third circuit regional section. Each section is composed of three magistrates, one of whom acts as chairman. It also has first instance courts, lower courts, and peace courts. The State Judicature Council is part of the Superior Court. This branch handles administration, civil service, inspection, and discipline. It is composed of four counselors and a chairman. One counselor is the magistrate; another is the Executive Branch representative and another is the Morelos State Autonomous University Law School representative. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution From May, 1, 1996 to April 30, 1997 the budget increased to 53.2 million Mexican pesos ($5.8 million USD). Of this amount 48.6 million Mexican pesos (89%) ($5.3 million USD) were for salaries, 3% for supplies, 7% for general services, and 1% for goods and property. 3. Personnel As of April, 1997, the total number of employees was 950. Of that number, there were the chairman, 16 magistrates, 27 first instance judges, 12 lower court judges, 100 proceedings secretaries, 43 studies and account secretaries, 37 lower court proceedings secretaries, and 498 judicial officials. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers Entry Requirements The Judicature's Council designates public officials through opposition examinations. Regular alumni from the Law Enforcement and Justice Administration master's degree courses of the Morelos Autonomous University are primarily considered for appointment. 5. Training To those who study justice administration on the postgraduate level within Morelos Autonomous University, the Superior Court offers special grants. During October of 1996, 89 judicial officials were in the Justice Administration master degree courses. The Technical Institute arranges an Up to Date Permanent Cycle given by the Law Postgraduates National Council. For review of protection proceedings legislation and practice, 15 judges, as well as 5 proceedings secretaries, attended the course "Theoretical and Practical Themes on Civil, Commercial, Family and Penal Law Proceedings." In coordination with other law enforcement and justice administration institutions, regular lecture cycles are organized. During the annual report period, the Institute arranged 13 lectures that 2,930 people attended. Also during the same period, there were several courses on civil and penal practice attended by 254 judicial officials. 6. Salaries No data given. 7. Accountability The State Judicature Council is the Court's unit empowered for surveillance and discipline of the performance or public officials. During the 1996- 1997 period 119 misconduct allegations were received. Administrative responsibility was found in 15 cases; in 49 no responsibility was found; 5 were dismissed and 55 acquitted. For these matters in the Council, the General Inspection Office handled 56 allegations; according to the Court's record books 115 reports were issued. To control the inner Council administrative areas, there is also an Accountability Office. 8. Technology During the report period, the Court acquired 35 word processors as well as maintenance equipment. To supply equipment for justice administration an auxiliary fund for justice administration is available, independently managed by Court. There is also a Computers and Information Juridical Center. Its main tasks are: to keep and preserve statistical records from jurisdictional activities; to develop and maintain administrative systems; to secure institutional activities and to provide computer maintenance. Through this office 90% of judicial personnel were trained in computer-based information processing. 9. Sentences and Appeals In the penal and auxiliary sections 6,916 rulings were issued and 1,475 cases were resolved. Courts of first instance filed 2,487 initial cases, resolved 1,549 and issued 1,886 sentences. Penal courts and lower courts received 1,215 cases, resolved 2,240 and issued 384 sentences. Detailed statistics were given by first instance and lower penal courts in the State of Morelos (tables 24 and 25). State of Oaxaca Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following data is from the Second Annual Report delivered by the Chairman of Oaxaca's Superior Court of Justice, for the year 2000. The Superior Court of Justice is headed by a chairman and has seven sections, each with three magistrates, one of whom acts as chairman. There are three sections for penal matters, two civil, and one auxiliary. The State has 15 first instance civil sections, 18 penal, 6 family, and 31 combined sections. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution No data given. 3. Personnel No data given. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers Entry Requirements A judicial Service Training and Specialization Institute handles the training and updating for the first instance judges, the proceedings, studies and account sections secretaries, and project and proceedings court secretaries. Designation as a judicial official is through oppositions examinations in three progressive stages: theoretical, practical, and public oral examinations; also by the participant's evaluation by a jury of court magistrates. 5. Training The Judicial Service Training and Specialization Institute provides training, and develops theoretical and practical study courses. During the report period, training courses for public defenders, Public Ministry agents, and the Social Rehabilitation and Prevention Personnel's office were developed. Also developed were: Public Defenders updating course; updating course for Central Judicial District enforcement personnel; Judicial Specialization Second Course; a special training course for personnel from the Migrant's State Coordination; training courses for judicial and enforcement court secretaries from Itsmo, Papaloapan, Coastal and Mixteca regions; Penal process training course addressed to National Indigenous Peoples Institute translators; training course for personnel from the Executive Power General Accountability office. There were eight lectures on juridical issues in this period, titled as follows: Alternative Means to Resolve Matters in Dispute; Punishment Individualization, That Thing Named Justice; Municipal Mayor Activities, Physical Evidence and Penal Responsibility; Economic Law Impact on Civil and Penal Matters; New Millennia Juridical Deontology, Otero's Formula on Protection Proceedings. The Institute conducts regional meetings between magistrates, judges, court secretaries and Public Ministry agents regarding common interest issues. During 2000, eight conferences with the following issues were held: Punishment Individualization; General Criteria on Civil and Commercial Procedure Matters; Appeals on Civil and Commercial Matters; Proof Evaluation on Penal Matter; Commercial Miscellaneous; Criminal Authorship and Participation; Proof, Terms, Resources and Appeals on Commercial Matter and Material Resources on Commercial Matters. Through the Public Security National System, the Court is united with EDUSAT, a distance education system for judicial officials using satellite transmissions of teleconferences and long distance courses. The Institute trains and advises municipal mayors. Although not considered as judicial officers, by law they can act in some cases as law enforcement auxiliaries. During 2000, 1,055 mayors were trained. 6. Salaries No data given. 7. Responsibility The Court's Proceedings General Secretariat administers misconduct allegations and petitions from State and national human rights commissions. The Court's Inspection office hears cases of judicial responsibility and enforces sanctions, ranging from warning to removal from office. The Internal Accountability office is authorized to supervise administrative responsibilities. During the report period, 34 judicial and administrative audits were performed. 8. Technology In 2000, 70 State courts received computer equipment. Training and special computer programs were developed. A short term plan to establish local and regional networks included expansion of the central building network from 26 to 100 users. 9. Sentences and Appeals The first, second, and third penal sections, and the auxiliary section had the following activity: Cases Cases Section filed resolved Total penal cases 4,345 4,111 First penal section 1,359 1,219 Second penal section 1,464 1,389 Third penal section 1,522 1,503 Auxiliary section 895 827 The 70 courts distributed among the 7 State regions filed 20,617 cases. Of these, 5,897 were penal cases. They concluded 3,669 cases: 2,568 guilty verdicts; 772 dismissals; 66 for other causes. The Central Valleys region has 24 courts, 8 of which handle penal matters. In those courts 2,101 penal cases were filed. The Mixteca region has 8 courts. One of its penal courts had 495 cases filed. La Cañada region has 3 combined courts that filed 179 penal cases. La Sierra has 7 combined courts, filing 273 penal cases. The Coastal region has eight courts. One is penal and the rest combined. They filed 912 penal cases. The Papaloapan region has eight courts, three to handle penal matters and another three combined. They filed 906 penal cases. The Istmo region has 12 courts, 5 devoted to penal cases and 1 combined. They filed 1,031 penal cases. During 2000, 120 inmates received acquittal orders, 232 release proceedings, and 8 dismissals. The first instance penal courts activity for Oaxaca were also reported for 2000 (table 26). State of Queretaro Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following data came from this web page: . According to the State of Queretaro's Superior Court of Justice Organic Law of February 27, 1997, this court is composed of 10 proprietor magistrates and 8 supernumeraries, in 3 sections: civil, penal, and electoral (apart from elections and according to full house dispositions, the electoral section may support other sections). The State's first instance courts in Queretaro consist of 10 civil, 6 penal, and 2 family courts. In San Juan del Rio there are 2 civil and 2 penal courts. There is one combined court each in the judicial districts of Caderyta, Tomilan, Jalpan, Amealco, as well as 19 courts in municipalities distributed within its territory. The State's judicial system is divided into administration, auxiliary organs and branch managements as follows: Correspondence, Citizens Services and Counseling office, Actuaries and Experts Coordination, State Settlements Center, General Management, Accountability office, Financial and Accounts office, Judicial Specialization Institute and Informatics Department. It also has a Judicature Council devoted to administrative tasks, judicial service, and discipline. The citizen's counseling and services area assists victims and Indians; advises and guides in matters related to court proceedings; and also acts as experts conducting social and family studies and proposing reforms to the law. The State Settlements Center offers services in alternative means to resolve disputes, particularly those related to family, civil, and penal matters by complaint. Alternative means are procedures to conclude a lawsuit out of court. They are basically negotiation, mediation, agreement, and arbitration. The procedure is done before a mediator, a qualified person trained to ease communication between parties and help them reach a resolution. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution No data available. 3. Personnel No data available. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements The Judicial Service system, under the State Judicature Council's responsibility, is composed of the human resources administration, academic training, and selection subsystems. For operations, the administration subsystem is a branch of the general management area. The academic training subsystem is the Institute's responsibility. For the selection subsystem, the Institute devises profiles and professional requirements, admission examinations and personnel promotion, and conducts psychological, knowledge and curricular pre-evaluations of applicants. 5. Training The Judicial Specialization Institute began operations in January 1986. It is directly linked to the Federal Judicature Council. Its main tasks are: formation, development, specialization, and updating of the judiciary and judicial aspirants; judicial service operational management; editing activities. The Institute's training duties are to: identify needs; prioritize training; create training programs; prepare academic activities, such as courses, workshops, and seminars; evaluate activities and programs to facilitate assignment of personnel. 6. Salaries 7. Responsibility 8. Technology Each judicial and administrative area is supplied with information systems. To this date networks are provided allowing public officials access to State laws, federal or local compilation of laws, jurisprudence and some other relevant issues. 9. Figures on sentences and appeals State of Sinaloa Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following information came from this web page: . The Court is composed of four sections, two penal, one civil and one family. There are 21 penal courts, 16 civil courts, 5 family courts and 11 combined courts. During 1995 three circuit unitary sections were created to receive appeals coming from decisions issued by first instance penal, civil or family judges. During 1999 two more circuit sections were created, one for civil and one for penal matters. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution 3. Personnel 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements 5. Training 6. Salaries 7. Responsibility 8. Technology 9. Figures on sentences and appeals During the first quarter of 1999, in the Superior Court of Justice, the Second Stage sections received 919 cases and 942 cases were resolved. Circuit sections received 2,002 cases and resolved 1,638 cases. The first instance penal courts received 1,483 cases, and resolved 1,677 cases with 1,002 sentences announced. In the lower courts there were 1,999 cases. State of Zacatecas Superior Court of Justice 1. Administrative Organization The following information came from the 1999-2000 Annual Report of the Superior Court of Justice Chairman for the period September 1, 1999 to August 31, 2000. Zacatecas' court is composed of a chairman, two civil sections, and two penal sections. The first instance structure has 18 judicial districts and 35 courts; 15 specialized jurisdictions and 20 combined. The report emphasized a need for more faculties, and the Superior Court's desire for these changes: control over the direct administration of the municipal courts, broader jurisdiction, greater judicial power, and appointment of its judges by the court itself. Allowing municipal courts to hear penal matters for crimes with maximum sentences of 2 years would reduce the first instance court caseload by 50% to 60%. 2. Annual budget and expenditures distribution The legislature approved an annual budget of $5.1 million (USD) for 1999. This amount represented 1.1% of the total State budget. For 2000, the budget increased to $6.5 million (USD), (a 27% increase) representing 1.0% of the State budget. 3. Personnel The Zacatecas judicial branch consists of 399 employees. To end delays in issuing summons and arrest warrants a special program was implemented, as a result of this the number of personnel was increased in penal courts in the State's capitol. 4. Judges, Magistrates and Ministers entry requirements No information given. 5. Training To train and professionalize civil service officers, the Superior Court has a Judicial Development and Modernization Secretariat. Through fellowships, judges and magistrates in service specialize by taking post graduate courses at local and foreign universities. During the report period 2 magistrates and 14 judges were granted fellowships. Also, 2 magistrates and 21 judges concluded post graduate studies on juridical matters related to judicial activities. 6. Salaries By January 2000 the first instance judges received a 26% wage increase. 7. Accountability The Superior Court receives misconduct allegations against judicial officers. During the period seven allegations were received and three carried from the past administration. Nine were resolved -- four by proceedings, five by dismissal -- and one was pending. First instance courts are inspected to assess their performance. The opinions of attorneys and the public are gathered on the officials' performance of duties, and corrective measures are applied. In the report period there were 34 inspections. The Full Section Proceedings General Secretariat is authorized to analyze penal files. During the annual report period, 3,659 cases were analyzed and 551 cases were returned to original courts to correct deficiencies found. 8. Technology The Superior Court has modernized its information processing equipment. During the report period 75 computers were obtained. 9. Figures on sentences and appeals The First Penal Section reported 645 cases. 580 were concluded, 519 with sentences, 61 with other causes, and 65 were left pending. The Second Penal Section reported 604 cases, 504 with sentences, 75 with other causes, 2 suspended, and 59 pending cases. At the close of the period, the first instance penal courts reported 4,567 cases, plus 3,546, total 8,113 cases. Of those, 2,437 ended in the following ways: 1,684 with sentences, 753 with other causes (acquittals, dismissals, or unspecified), and 1,285 files received suspension orders. SECTION IX. PENITENTIARY OR OPEN PRISON. 1. Administrative Organization. As cited in Section IV, point 9, part C, in Mexico the conditional sentence is the element that resembles a probation system. The government organ in charge is the Freedom Sentences Control Office, a branch of the Prevention and Social Reincorporation office, which is a branch of the Prevention and Social Reincorporation of the Federal Public Security Secretariat. In local jurisdictions such as the States and the Federal District there are similar offices. Since there is no probation system, persons under conditional release are required to sign in once a week at the assigned or similar office. 2. Annual budget No information available 3. Probation officers and convicts There are no specialized officers exclusively devoted to attend or supervise the fulfillment of a conditional release. On the Federation level, there are no data on the number of convicts with conditional release. For the Federal District (Mexico City) for 1999 the Patronato para la Reincorporación Social por el Empleo reported 66 cases of conditional release. (Interior Secretariat, ). 4. Entry requirements for probation officer. Not applicable due to the non-existence of a system of probation. 5. Initial Training. Not applicable. 6. Salary Not applicable. Section X. PRISONS AND JAILS 1. Administrative Organization A. Organization. The prison system in Mexico is a function of the Executive Office. At the Federation level, the Public Security Secretariat is responsible for this system. Prisons are distinguished from jails. The former are for convicts with a loss of freedom on a preventive basis (penal process) or for confinement (sentence). They are institutions established by the Federal government and the State governments (including the Federal District) according to their respective criminal jurisdictions. Jails are municipal institutions and are used to incarcerate people convicted of lesser crimes or misdemeanors. B. Number of Prisons. According to the Secretary of the Interior's website, in July 2000, Mexico's penitentiary system was organized into 446 confinement centers (table 27). Slightly different figures are given on the website of the Secretary of Public Security which reports the number of confinement centers with the distribution of the prison population (table 28). Regarding security levels, there are three maximum security centers, one minimum, and the rest are considered as medium. Municipal jails are not considered under the present classification due to arraignment for misdemeanors or administrative faults. About 43% of the total population in custody were those held during the process of investigation and trial. The rest were those who had been sentenced (table 29). During September 1999 in the Federal District penitentiary system 6,143 persons were in process and 11,100 were sentenced. Source: Ciudades Seguras. Vol. III, El sistema de Justicia Penal en la Ciudad de México, 2002, Fondo de Cultura Económica. The majority of inmates are male: 159,991 (95.6%) males versus 7,347 females. The total prison population increased by 179% between 1995 and 2000 (table 30) . C. Juvenile Detention Centers No information available. 2. Annual Budget No information available. 3. Figures A. Guards For the Federal District during 1999, there were 2,078 prison system guards. Source: Ciudades Seguras. Vol. III, El sistema de Justicia Penal en la Ciudad de México, 2002, Fondo de Cultura Económica. On the federal level no information was available about the number of guards. B. Inmates C. Capacity. The capacity was built to hold 121,635 inmates. In January 2001, the Federation's inmate population reached 156,856, an over-population of 35,221 inmates. Prison overcrowding in the State of Baja California and the Federal District was high. The State of Baja California system had a capacity of 3,708 spaces but housed 10,801 inmates, an over- population of 7,093 inmates. The Federal District had an over-population of 7,284 inmates (capacity, 14,864 and actual population, 22,148). Source: INEGI. "Indicadores Sociodemográficos de Mexico. (1930-2000)," page 288. Figures on capacity and overcrowding provided by the Secretary of Public Security vary slightly from those quoted above, but still document overcrowding (table 31). 4. Entry Requirements for Custodians. No information available. 5. Initial Training for Custodians No information available. 6. Initial salary for Custodians No information available. 7. Accountability Penitentiary officials are subject to an accountability process specified in their particular working conditions. Internal accountability offices are within the penitentiary system's administrative structure. They are responsible for identifying and investigating misconduct committed by penitentiary officials. Human rights commissions are relevant agencies for controlling penitentiary officials. They investigate accusations and complaints of inadequate treatment inside confinement centers, and recommend resolutions for human rights violations. 8. Rehabilitation Activities The Constitution's Article 18, paragraph 2, establishes that work, training, and education are means for delinquent social rehabilitation. Those principles are the basis for the organization of the country's penitentiary system. The Federation and Federal District established wages according to work and education as treatment to foster inmates' social rehabilitation. Work partially reduces the sentence and provides economic support during confinement. The requirements for work are physical and mental aptitude, skills and training for every inmate. Education must cover civic, hygienic, artistic, physical and ethical aspects. Academic training is supposed to establish a special freedom. For deprived adults the instruction aims to help them finish basic and advanced studies. It is mandatory for every confinement center to maintain a library. The Federal District provides data on its prison rehabilitation programs (tables 32 to 37)./49 9. Inmates' Rights (Amenities and Privileges) The Federal District prison regulations clearly state that food shall be high quality; planned by a nutrition specialist on a weekly basis; prepared by the proper equipment and served three times a day. The Federation and Federal District have medical services units in prisons that provide inmates with free medical attention. In cases requiring external medical service an internal technical council must give authorization prior to treatment. Inmates are allowed visits from family, friends, spouses, authorities, counselors, defense attorneys or chaplains. The general management office authorizes every visit in advance. Special facilities for defense attorneys or spouses are available. External means of communication such as the telephones and the mail are also provided. Prison personnel check each package to prevent the illegal entry of forbidden items. Unconventional communication such as mobile telephones are prohibited. In addition to the sentence-reduction-through-work scheme, penal law provides early release in cases of intentional crimes when the offender has served three-fifths of his sentence; in the case of imprudent crimes, when half the sentence has been served. During 1999 in the Federal District 7 persons obtained partial remission and 37 early release. Source: Ciudades Seguras. Vol. III, El sistema de Justicia Penal en la Ciudad de México, 2002, Fondo de Cultura Económica. Section XI. JUVENILE JUSTICE 1,2. Organization and Jurisdiction Mexico has a special jurisdiction for juveniles, both in the Federation and the Federal District, the Minors Council. It is a function of the Executive Power, instead of the Judicial Power. According to Article 8 of the Juvenile Delinquency Treatment Law for the common and federal jurisdictions, the Minors Council is composed of the following: Chairman's Council Superior Section Agreements General Secretary Superior Section Unitary counselors according to budget Interdisciplinary Technical Committee Agreement secretaries of unitary counselors Actuaries Three supernumerary counselors Minor defense attorney's unit Technical and administrative units For minors, the State adopts clinical criteria that occasionally conflict with the general guidelines of penal law (table 38). SECTION XII. INDIGENOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS Indigenous justice is an action, or series of actions, taken by Indian communities or individuals through decision and command structures to impose sanctions upon people who violate norms, or behave in an improper manner. These actions or series of actions are based on norms to establish socially acceptable behavior, or are an evaluation of improper conduct, by collective authorities. According to the XII Population and Housing General Census for 2000, there were more than 8,300,000 Indians throughout Mexican territory. They speak 84 languages other than Spanish and constitute an ethno-cultural mosaic. In discussing Mexican Indian people, two geographical and cultural areas are historically distinguished, Mesoamerica and Aridoamerica. In the North, Aridoamerica Indian social systems maintain organizational command structures. They are defined in tribal terms by belonging to a particular language group, or to different tribes with a common linguistics group. Two examples are the Tepehuanos and Yaquis tribes. The northern indigenous social systems are governmental structures that allow people to resolve common problems and establish their own rules for communal life. Most have been historic means to survive, struggle, and negotiate its enforcement and institutional recognizance in various degrees. Mesoamerica, that spreads through Central and South America, follows the reverse of this system. The community is the basic organizational structure. It is the social space associated with the locality-settlement and the source of identity, belonging, and authority. Community offices resolve important matters. Responsibility for handling civil matters or imparting justice belongs to a "judge" or "delegate." In the case of community land ownership, regarding agrarian matters, the Common Assets Commissariat is empowered to resolve issues; or, in the case of public land property, the Public Land Commissariat. The offices constitute a superior authority that is empowered to make decisions, and discuss issues in public assembly, committee, or a specific authority. The main role of these offices are to resolve internal disputes through settlement. They also supervise community tasks, such as festivities, or temporary or permanent committees that develop welfare programs. Mexico's judicial system recognized indigenous justice matters. In 1992 the Mexican Constitution gave Indians the right to try land matters and practice their social uses and customs. This provision was surpassed by the constitutional reform of August 14, 2001. It established that the Indian population and their communities have the right to apply their own normative systems to regulate and resolve disputes. This was limited by fundamental constitutional principles with respect to basic civil rights, human rights, and particularly the dignity and integrity of women. Previously, four Federal entities had different means and proceedings for recognizing Indian justice, support, and equity. The State of Campeche recognized the validity of the internal norms in family relations, civil life, community organization, and generally the prevention and resolution of disputes inside the community. The Chiapas House of Representatives wrote legislation for the Supreme Court of Justice to establish indigenous peace and reconciliation courts. Indigenous court judges, supported by local authorities, apply sanctions according to traditions, usage, and customs. Their actions are limited by the constitution and by human rights. The House of Representatives from Quintana Roo State issued an indigenous justice law to allow the operation of an alternate indigenous justice. To supervise and train traditional judges a special judicature council for indigenous justice was formed. This was to guarantee full access to State jurisdiction with full respect for usage, customs, and ethnic traditions. Oaxaca is the fourth state that recognized the validity of internal norms in indigenous communities for family relations, civil life, community organization, and prevention and resolution of disputes, as long as Federal and State laws were preserved and there was no violation of human rights or harm to third parties. It also allowed that decisions taken by indigenous communities were valid and equal before the proper State authority, provided they did not contradict State rules or existing principles. In July, 2001, the total inmate population in the Mexican prison system included 7,334 indigenous individuals. SECTION XIII. TRANSNATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL CRIME AND JUSTICE 1. Procedures A,B. Extradition Treaties and Figures on Extraditions Mexico has signed extradition treaties with these countries: Portugal, Peru, Venezuela, Spain, Greece, the United States of America, Chile, Korea, France, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Argentina, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, the Netherlands, Italy, Cuba, Canada, Brasil, Belize, England, and Australia. Between December 1, 2000 and June 30, 2001, Mexico requested 22 extraditions that resulted in extradition of 5 persons; had 20 extradition requests from foreign states and extradited 16 persons. C,D. Foreign Prosecutions and Number of Foreign Prosecutions. No data available. E,F. Foreign Prisoner Transfer Treaties and Number of Prisoners Transferred As of June 30, 2001, 223 convict-transfers were authorized: 127 Mexican nationals were repatriated and 54 foreigners were transferred to their countries of origin. G. Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties. México has signed cooperation and mutual legal assistance treaties with: Germany, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, El Salvador, the United States of America, France, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Portugal, England, Ireland, Uruguay, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Chile, China, Ecuador, Spain, the Philippines, Honduras, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Paraguay, Perú, Dominican Republic, Rumania, Russia, Trinidad and Tobago. Between December 1, 2000 and June 30, 2001, Mexico requested 82 international legal assistance petitions and addressed 46 requests from other foreign countries. Before December 1, 2000, it cleared 123 requests -- 89 requested by Mexico and 34 from other foreign countries. 2. Foreign Law Enforcement/Justice Contacts A. Training. Mexico has received training from the following countries: the United States of America, Spain, Israel, and France. B. International Civilian Police Missions. No information available C. Regional Policy Planning. No information available D. Legats. No information available E. Joint Working Groups. No information available F. Transnational Crime Problems. The primary international crime problems are drug, vehicle, and arms trafficking, and money laundering. Mexico signed treaties with various countries regarding transnational criminal activities as follows: *drug control treaties with Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama. *minors trafficking treaties with Belize, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay. *interregional kidnaping treaty with the United States of America. *motor vehicles theft treaty with El Salvador. *sentence execution treaty with Panama, Venezuela, Cuba, and Guatemala. *supply of equipment for exclusive national police use with the United States of America. Section XIV. RESEARCH AND INFORMATION SOURCES 1. Research There are institutions researching public security and penal justice issues. Among them are the following: the Penal Sciences National Institute, the Metropolitan Autonomous University, the Juridical Research Institute of the National University, the College of Mexico, the Rafael Preciado Hernandez Foundation, and the Penal Sciences Mexican Academy. 2. Publications Magazines entirely devoted to criminality, public security and penal systems are: Criminalis, Alter, Alegatos and Iter Criminis. Two others report on activities related to criminality: Este Pais and the statistical yearbooks from the Statistics, Geography and Information National Institute. 3. Professional Associations Throughout Mexico associations and bars of local attorneys at law periodically hold conferences and workshops to analyze and discuss issues from criminality to penal law. Section XV. PUBLIC OPINION, SELF-HELP AND VIGILANTISM 1. Public Opinion Polls. Several polls on issues of criminality are conducted regularly. The Research Center on Public Opinions surveyed the public regarding their perception of problems in Mexico City. The surveys were administered to 1,575 people, 18 years or older in the Federal District (Mexico City). Similar survey data were published by the Research Center on Public Opinion in the monthly magazine, Este pais. Fifty-three percent of the respondents (interviewed December 2000) considered insecurity as the main problem of Mexico City (table 39). ("Este pais," number 122, May 2001, p. 45). Through its economics and social studies division, the Banco Nacional de Mexico conducted several polls between 1995 and 2000. The sample sizes averaged 1,800 respondents 18 years or older located at private addresses or public places. The surveys responses related to social trust of authorities regarding criminality. Respondents who reported they had been victims of violent acts during the preceding three months were asked if they had reported the crime to the authorities. In most years the majority responded that they had not reported the crime (table 40). 2. Justice by One's Own Hand Individuals have committed violent actions, from injuries to public execution, against persons who commit or are willing to commit crime. In some communities people's dissatisfaction with law enforcement -- due to local police corruption or lack of action -- has led to instances of lynchings./50 3. Citizen Violence against the Justice System or Its Representatives Public demonstrations and marches related to public insecurity issues have occurred. During police operations in specific communities, there have also been confrontations between community members and the police corps. Section XVI. SOURCES OF INFORMATION Aguayo, Quezada, Sergio. "El almanaque mexicano." Grijalbo y Hechos confiables. México. 2000. Anuario de estadísticas por entidad federativa. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática (INEGI). Edición 2000. México, 2000. Castellanos Tena, Fernando. "Lineamientos elementales del derecho penal." Porrúa, México, 1997. Estadísticas judiciales en materia penal. Cuaderno número 8. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática. México, 2000. Gudiño Galindo, Julián. "La seguridad pública en la Ciudad de México" (el primer año). En Bien Común y Gobierno, Fundación Rafael Preciado Hernández, A. C. Año 4, número 49, diciembre de 1998. Indicadores sociodemográficos de México (1930- 2000). Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática. México, 2000. Piekarewicz Sigal, Mina. "México, Diccionario de opinión pública." Grijalbo, Hoja Casa Editorial, S.A. de C.V., México, 2001. Tena Ramírez, Felipe. "Leyes fundamentales de México (1808-1999)." Porrúa, México, 1999. Magazines and newspapers. Este País. Número 122, mayo del 2001. Este País. Número 125, agosto del 2001. Reforma, Diario. "Tiene justicia dos caras para castigar a menores." 2 de agosto del 2001. Internet. Amnistía Internacional. . Gobierno del Distrito Federal. . Policía Federal Preventiva. . Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal. . Procuraduría General de la República. . Secretaría de Gobernación. . Legislation. Código de Procedimientos Penales para el Distrito Federal. Código Federal de Procedimientos Penales. Código Penal Federal. Código Penal para el Distrito Federal. Constitución Política de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Ley de Ejecución de Sanciones Penales para el Distrito Federal. Ley de la Defensoría de Oficio del Distrito Federal. Ley de la Defensoría Pública. Ley de la Policía Federal Preventiva. Ley Federal contra la Delincuencia Organizada. Ley General que establece las Bases de Coordinación del Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Pública. Ley Orgánica de la Procuraduría General de la República. Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial de la Federación. Ley para el Tratamiento de Menores Infractores para el Distrito Federal en materia Común y para toda la República en materia Federal. Reglamento de la Defensoría de Oficio Federal. Reglamento de la Ley de la Defensoría de Oficio del Fuero Común en el Distrito Federal. Reglamento Interior de la Secretaría de Seguridad Pública. English Language References The Associated Press, "Another Lynching," The News (Mexico City) September 14, 1996, p. 4. Mary Jordan, "Convict are Condemned To a "Paradise' in Mexico: Inmates, Families Housed Together in Unusual Experiment," The Washington Post, February 3, 2002, p. A22. Mary Jordan,"In Mexico, Justice at a Price: Inmate Couldn't Buy What He Needed -- His Name," The Washington Post, March 25, 2002, p. A01. Molly Moore, "Lynch Law The Rule in Mexican Towns," The Washington Post, September 7, 1996, A1, A8. "New Federal Project to Make Crime Statistics Reliable," The News (Mexico City) February 25, 2002, . S. Lynne Walker, "Mexico Seeks Tight Security, But Without Hurting Trade," Copley News Service, October 7, 2001. NOTES 1\ According to this theory, the Public Ministry on filing charges is not compelled to evaluate criminal intent. This evaluation belongs to the judge when the sentence is read. 2\ With the Finalist Action Theory, the Public Ministry is compelled to evaluate criminal intent when filing charges and the judge validates them or not when the sentence is read. 3\ In Spanish. Ley para el Tratamiento de Menores Infractores para el Distrito Federal en Materia del Fuero Común y para toda la República en Materia de Fuero Federal. 4\ When committing an action with penal consequences, a general principle in Mexican law is to separate adults from minors in two different procedures. When adults commit a crime a penal procedure starts and consequently a penal sanction is applied. If a minor executes a punishable act an administrative procedure operates. For instance, a security measure is applied such as treatment in a specialized center for minors. Adults are punished by the judicial power; minors, by a branch of the executive power. 5\ Several efforts were made by us to get a copy of the "Victimizations Survey," presumably conducted by federal government, without success. In an article from January 2002, published in "Nexos" magazine, Guillermo Zepeda Lecuona affirms: "Recently the Federal Government released a national survey performed in year 2001 in which it is reported that 90% of crimes are never denounced. The reasons are: "It's useless," distrust, or it is a minor crime. 6\ Civil or analogous responsibility is considered as damages' restitution. It involves the amount to be paid to restore the price of belongings, assets including health and psychotherapeutic treatments as consequence of crime necessary to restore health to the victim. 7\ The judge, while determining a sentence, must consider background and manner when the crime was committed (external circumstances); as well as, the personal motivations when committing the crime (the criminal personal features). 8\ The judge is authorized to order a partial or complete printing of the sentence in two national or local newspapers. 9\ Federation's Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 1. 10\Federation's Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 2. 11\ Federation's Judicial Power Organic Law, Articles 28, 33, and 42. 12\ Political Constitution, Article 100 and Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 68. 13\ 23/2001 Federal Judicature Council Full Court General Agreement regarding Mexico's division circuits, number and boundaries; number and territorial jurisdiction and matter specialization for Collegiate and Circuit Unitary Courts and District Courts. 14\ Federation's Expenditures Budget Decree for year 2001. 15\ Tom Slick Symposia. Reflections on the Judicial Powers' Public Budget. On independence and responsibility: balancing main democratic values from Mexico and United States Judicatures. Financial Executive Secretary. Federal Judicature Council. 16\ Idem. 17\ Supreme Court and Federal Judicature Council 2000 Report. 18\ Political Constitution, Article 95. 19\ Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 8. 20\ Political Constitution, Article 96. 21\ Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 106. 22\ Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 108. 23\ Political Constitution. Article 97. 24\ Judicial Power Organic Law, Article 112. 25\ Judicial Power Organic Law. Articles 113, 114, and 117. 26\ Federal Judicial Power Organic Law. Article 92. 27\ Supreme Court of Justice, President, Minister David Gongora Pimentel, 2000 Annual Report. Considering period between November 16, 1999 to November 30, 2000. 28\ Title IV. Political Constitution. 29\ Federation's Judicial Power Organic law. Article 133. 30\ General Agreement 48/1998 to regulate Federal Judicature Council Organization and Functioning. 31\ Federation's Judicial Power Organic Law. Title 8. 32\ Supreme Court of Justice and Judicature Council President. Annual Report. 33\ Federal Judicature Council V Anniversary, Speech by Federal Judicature Council President's. Mexico City, April 27, 2000. 34\ Supreme Court of Justice and Judicature Council President, 2000 Annual Report. 35\ Source: Superior Court of Justice, Judicial Studies Institute. 36\ La Imparticion de Justicia en el Distrito Federal 1995-1999 Supreme Court of Justice. 37\ La Imparticion de Justicia en el Distrito Federal 1995-1999. Federal District Supreme Court of Justice. 38\ Political Constitution. Article 122. Fourth Base. 39\ Superior Court of Justice Organic Law. Title Second. From Conditions and Prohibitions to Exercise Judicial Functions. 40\ Supreme Court of Justice Chairman, 1999-2000 Annual Report. November 14, 2000. 41\ La imparticion de Justicia en el Distrito Federal 1995-2000. Federal District Supreme Court of Justice. 42\ From Federal Judicature Institute. 43\ La imparticion de Justicia en el Distrito Federal 1995-2000. Federal District Supreme Court of Justice. 44\ Superior Court of Justice for Federal District Organic Law. 12th Title. From Official Responsibilities. 45\ La imparticiòn de Justicia en el Distrito Federal 1995-1999 Supreme Court of Justice. 46\ Supreme Court of Justice chairman, 1999-2000 Annual Report. November 14, 2000. 47\ Chiapas State Superior Court of Justice, web page. 48\ Supreme Court of Justice of Jalisco, State, web page. 49\ For tables 34-38, the source does not clarify the type of activities. 50\ Moore, Molly, "Lynch Law The Rule in Mexican Towns" The Washington Post, Sept 7, 1996, A1 A8; The Associated Press, "Another Lynching," The News (Mexico City) Sept 14, 1996, pg. 4; Jordan, Mary "Dubious Justice in a Mexico Village": Vigilantes Block Path to Modernity," The Washington Post July 31, 2001, A01. About the author Ernesto Lopez Portillo teaches at the National Institute on Penal Sciences (Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Penales). He is an advisor for the Mexican Chamber of Deputies. In 1994 he published the book, "Seguridad Publica en Mexico." Since then he has published in various magazines (among them Dialogo y Debate, Etcetera, Milenio, Nexos, Criminalia, Revista Mexicana de Justicia). Essays from the author are published in two books: "El Desafio Democratico de Mexico: Seguridad y Estado de Derecho" and "Transnational Crime and Public Security." Between 1990 and 1996 he served as advisor for the Mexican Federal Attorney General's Office (Procuraduría General de la Republica). He has conducted several studies on policing issues throughout Latin America and Europe. He is associate editor for the "World Police Encyclopedia" to be published by Routledge in 2003. About the translator Carlos Becerril Torres is a freelance journalist. During the past decade he frequently contributed articles on classical music and recordings to Mexican newspapers (El Nacional, La Jornada, Uno más Uno, and Reforma). This work led him to translate writings from other fields, including the sciences, arts, and humanities. Done first for his personal knowledge, his translations were eventually published in various magazines and newspapers. In 1995 Mr. Becerril joined the Federal Attorney General's office (Procuraduría General de la Republica) where he held various positions as writer or translator. From 1998 through 2000 he served as Foreign Press Director for the Federal Attorney General's Press Office. End of file 06/03/03 ih