Mexico before the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture: between legal safeguards and impunity

Por: Natalia Pérez Cordero

The recent visit of the Subcomité de Naciones Unidas per la Prevención de la Tortura to Mexico, which took place from January 25 to 30, 2026, aimed to confront the country with an unpleasant situation: a process that accepts persons deprived of their liberty and the conditions of institutions that must guarantee their dignity, but often reproduces abuses and arbitrariness. Various institutions, such as prisons, hospitals, mental hospitals and addiction treatment centers, were subject to inspections combined with confidential interviews to reveal practices that may constitute torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

It is not the first time that Mexico has come to this survey, the subcommittee had an official visit in 2008 and 2016. However, this third assessment is taking place under the administration of Morena and the presidency of Claudia Sheinbaum, which allows for the first time to counter the official narrative that claims that torture is not practical in Mexico. The subcommittee acknowledged regulatory advances such as the publication of the 2017 General Prevention of Torture Act, but pointed to a gap between document and reality: laws exist, but implementation is still insufficient.

Please note that, unlike previous visits, the itinerary does not include visits to migration stations or military facilities. This omission is significant because as recently as 2024, a fire at a migration station in Ciudad Juárez left 40 dead, a brutal record of how these spaces have been the focus of serious human rights abuses.

Meanwhile, the subcommittee expressed particular concern about so-called “annexos,” addiction treatment centers that operate under the regulation, primarily because cases of ill-treatment, forced recruitment, disappearances and murders, many of which are controlled by criminal groups, have been documented.

Impunity is maintained as a conductor, as are the obstacles that arise for prompt and effective investigations into torture. In this regard, Human Rights Watch mentions in its recent World Report 2026 that impunity is widespread in Mexico, one of the reasons being that the tax authorities “require caretakers of prescribed taxes, materials, basic resources and adequate protection to get the job done”, which has caused the continued illegal practice of obtaining securities that have been altered, tortured or forged or falsified. On the other hand, the World Organization Against Torture, in its World Torture Index published last year, signaled that torture in the country is becoming more widespread.

Another theme highlighted was the strengthening of the National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture through the establishment of its Technical Committee and enabling the collaboration of civil society, which is relevant in a context where spaces for participation and construction are jointly limited, in addition to creating an integral system for the prevention of torture in Mexico.

From the bottom up, we hope that in these conclusions we can speak on a large scale for a more permissive use of armed forces in civilian areas and public security, with greater control, to prevent serious violations of human rights; the permanence of the “prisión prevent officiosa” figure, weighed down by what courts such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (CoIDH) have ordered its removal in Mexico; or in light of the government’s demand to push through a reform that would allow the figure of “juices without a beak”, which the same CoIDH has condemned in its repeated jurisprudence, to prevent those who are prosecuted from knowing “the identity of the judiciary and to assess their suitability and competence, as well as to determine whether they represent causal factors of appeal, [para] to defend himself before an independent and impartial tribunal”.

Finally, it is important to ensure that once the subcommittee issues information with the conclusions of its visit, the Mexican state will publish it, it can also decide whether to publish it or not, which practice is a form of transparency of the results of its assessment, which allows civil society organizations and direct and indirect victims of the procedures, tribulations and retreats in the fight and prevention of torture; Furthermore, as the subcommittee stated, whistleblower publicity is itself a precautionary measure.

* Natalia is an investigator for the Human Rights and Lucha Against Impunity @FundarMexico program.