## Facts

- Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, faced a long-running pattern of disappearances and killings of women, often involving sexual violence and persistent impunity.
- In 2001, Claudia Ivette González (20), Esmeralda Herrera Monreal (15), and Laura Berenice Ramos Monárrez (17) disappeared after leaving or attempting to reach school or work in Ciudad Juárez.
- Families repeatedly sought immediate official action; authorities allegedly minimized the reports and delayed searches and investigative measures.
- On November 6, 2001, the bodies of the three victims and five other women were found in a cotton field near an industrial area.
- Evidence indicated extreme violence, including sexual abuse; the crimes fit a broader pattern of gender-based violence in the area.
- Authorities allegedly mishandled the crime scene and evidence, delayed opening and pursuing key investigative steps, and relied on stereotyped assumptions that impeded effective searches and accountability.
- Domestic investigations did not produce timely, effective results or adequate remedies for the victims’ families.
- Petitions were brought through the inter-American system; the matter was referred for adjudication on preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs.

## Issues

1. Whether Mexico breached its duties under the American Convention on Human Rights to respect and ensure rights by failing to prevent the disappearances and deaths in a known context of gender-based violence.
2. Whether Mexico failed to investigate the disappearances and killings promptly, seriously, and effectively, and to provide judicial guarantees and judicial protection to the victims’ families.
3. Whether the State’s conduct reflected gender-based discrimination and stereotyping, violating equality and non-discrimination obligations.
4. Whether Mexico violated special protection duties owed to the minor victims.

## Decision

- The Court rejected Mexico’s preliminary objection and found Mexico internationally responsible for multiple violations.
- The Court held Mexico violated the rights to life, humane treatment, and personal liberty (American Convention arts. 4, 5, 7) in relation to the obligation to respect and ensure rights (art. 1(1)) due to lack of due diligence in prevention in a known risk context.
- For Esmeralda and Laura, the Court additionally found a violation of the rights of the child (art. 19) for failure to take special protective measures.
- The Court found violations of duties to prevent, investigate, and punish violence against women under the Belém do Pará Convention (art. 7(b), 7(c)), linked to the Convention rights at issue.
- The Court found violations of judicial guarantees and judicial protection (arts. 8(1), 25) for deficient investigations and ineffective remedies for relatives.
- The Court found violations tied to gender discrimination and stereotyping under non-discrimination and equality obligations (arts. 1(1), 24).
- Remedies included compensation, renewed investigative obligations, a public acknowledgment of responsibility, memorialization at the site, training and protocols, and reforms to search and investigative practices for violence against women.

## Legal Principles

- When authorities know or should know of a real and immediate risk arising from a pattern of gender-based violence, the State has heightened positive duties to prevent harm through effective legal, administrative, and operational measures.
- Due diligence in disappearances and gender-based violence requires immediate search efforts, prompt initiation of investigations, proper preservation and collection of evidence, and coordinated institutional action.
- Investigations into violence against women must be free from gender stereotypes and incorporate a gender-sensitive approach recognizing typical patterns of sexual and gender-based violence.
- Failures marked by dismissive or victim-blaming assumptions can constitute discrimination and can taint both preventive measures and investigative effectiveness, engaging equality and non-discrimination duties.
- Children are entitled to special measures of protection; failure to act swiftly and protectively upon a minor’s disappearance may constitute a distinct violation in addition to violations of life, integrity, and liberty.
- Reparations may include both individual measures and structural guarantees of non-repetition where violations arise in a context of persistent discrimination and impunity.

## Conclusion

The Court held Mexico responsible for failing to prevent and effectively investigate the disappearances and killings of three young women in Ciudad Juárez, finding that discriminatory state inaction and stereotyped responses violated multiple Convention rights and the Belém do Pará duties, and ordering wide-ranging reparations and institutional reforms aimed at preventing recurrence.


González (Cotton Field) v. Mexico, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 205 (Nov. 16, 2009)