On June 24th, 2026, the Federal Government published in the Official Gazette of the Federation the official summary of the judgment issued on September 30th, 2025, by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case “Ascencio Rosario et al. v. Mexico”.
Facts
Mrs. Ernestina Ascencio Rosario, a 73-year-old indigenous Nahuatl woman, was found in February 2007 in Tetlalzinga, Veracruz, gravely injured after reporting that soldiers had raped her, in a context of poverty, discrimination, and militarization. She died two days later without receiving adequate medical care. Initial forensic examinations revealed signs of sexual violence and the presence of multiple assailants. Although various investigations and testimonies pointed to the responsibility of military personnel, state authorities discredited these accounts and quickly closed the case, initially concluding that she had died of natural causes.
Years later, the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) acknowledged serious errors in its prior investigation, admitting that sexual rape had indeed occurred, that a gendered due-diligence approach had been lacking, and that there had been concealment, witness intimidation, and obstacles to accessing information, all of which contributed to impunity in the case.
Rights Violated
The Inter-American Court concluded that Mrs. Ernestina Ascencio Rosario was a victim of sexual rape by military personnel, which constituted torture and resulted in her death, aggravated by the lack of adequate medical care and language barriers, thereby violating her rights to life, personal integrity, dignity, and health. The Court emphasized that the case must be analyzed through an intersectional lens, given her status as an elderly indigenous woman in a context of militarization. It further determined that the Mexican State failed in its duty to investigate with due diligence and a gender perspective, prematurely closed the case, relied on discriminatory stereotypes, and allowed undue interference by military jurisdiction, generating impunity and violating the victim’s and her family members’ rights to justice, equality, and truth. The family members also suffered harm to their emotional integrity as a result of the violence, the impunity, and the intimidation they faced. Nevertheless, the Court found no state responsibility regarding the partial restriction of access to information, determining that such restriction was justified and proportionate.
Reparations
The Inter-American Court ordered comprehensive reparation measures, establishing that the judgment itself constitutes a form of reparation, and requiring the Mexican State to conduct a thorough investigation with a gender and ethnic perspective in order to hold the responsible parties accountable, exclusively within civil jurisdiction. The Court also ordered rehabilitation measures for the victim’s family members; satisfaction measures such as the public dissemination of the judgment and a formal acknowledgment ceremony; and educational scholarships. In addition, it ordered guarantees of non-repetition, including training for public officials, improvements to health services, appropriate protocols for indigenous women, and mechanisms to overcome language barriers, as well as the establishment of an interpreter registry. Finally, the State must pay compensation, cover litigation costs, and reimburse expenses to the legal assistance fund.
Reflections
This judgment is significant because it officially recognizes that sexual violence against indigenous women—particularly in contexts of militarization—can constitute torture and give rise to the State’s international responsibility. It also brings visibility to the structural discrimination faced by elderly indigenous women by requiring an intersectional approach (encompassing gender, age, and ethnic origin) in the delivery of justice. Furthermore, it establishes key standards: the obligation to investigate with due diligence and a gender perspective, the inadmissibility of military jurisdiction in human rights violations, and the need to eliminate linguistic and cultural barriers in health and justice systems. Finally, it contributes to combating impunity by acknowledging the State’s failures, vindicating the victim’s truth, and ordering structural measures to prevent the recurrence of such events.
Human rights violations committed by agents of the Mexican State occur regardless of which political party holds power. It is therefore essential to maintain vigilance over governmental conduct, to advocate for the respect and promotion of human rights, and to demand accountability from authorities who violate them.
