POSTED BY MARTIN KICH

Mexico

In January 2015, the Universidad Valle de Mexico campus in the Mexican border city of Nuevo Laredo was “closed for more than a week due to threats and attempted extortion by gangsters”: “The campus closed in response to a threat received from a criminal gang that wanted to enter the facilities, and if not [permitted to do so], [said] it would retaliate,’ said Sophie Anaya, vice president for corporate affairs and communications for the Universidad Valle de Mexico” (Pena). The Nuevo Laredo campus has an enrollment of about 700 and “is part of the network of U.S.-based Laureate International Universities, which operates educational institutions in over 20 countries” (Pena). According to Anaya, university “officials were working on a plan to offer alternatives so students [could] continue their education” (Pena). The Nuevo Laredo campus is not the first Mexican campus of the Universidad Valle de Mexico to be closed in response to threats by narco gangs: In September 2014, “the Universidad Valle de Mexico’s campus in Reynosa, across from McAllen, Texas, temporarily suspended activities because of a similar threat. ‘We asked authorities to give us additional protection in order to restart classes, but that additional protection is not there yet,’ Anaya said. ‘We are continuing with classes there, but on high alert’” (Pena). Other educational institutions in the region have been similarly impacted by the narco gangs operating in the region: “In December, the director of the Autonomous University of Tamaulipas’ Reynosa campus was abducted from his home by armed men. He remains missing. Also last year, the Montessori American School in Ciudad Victoria closed down due to extortion threats” (Pena).

____________________

In September 2014, 43 students from a teacher’s college in Ayotzinapa disappeared, and the remains of only one of those students have ever been recovered. The official account of the mass murder presented by the Mexican Attorney General’s office asserts that “the 43 had been detained by municipal police and handed over to members of a criminal group, who killed them and burnt their bodies in a nearby municipal dump” (“Mexico . . .”). But, on September 6, 2015, an international expert group appointed by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IAHCR) published a report that, according to Jose Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch, “’provides an utterly damning indictment of Mexico’s handling of the worst human rights atrocity in recent memory, [for] even with the world watching and with substantial resources at hand, the authorities proved unable or unwilling to conduct a serious investigation’” (“Mexico . . .”). More specifically, the report contends that “the official investigation was marred by the mishandling, loss, and possible destruction of key evidence”: “State authorities failed to adequately secure and document different crime scenes, leaving crucial pieces of evidence, such as blood and hair, vulnerable to contamination and manipulation. In July 2015, more than nine months into the investigation, the group discovered that multiple articles of clothing belonging to the victims had been collected but never examined. Federal prosecutors neglected to review security camera footage until requested by the expert group, at which point much of it had been erased. For example, a video recording of a confrontation between students and police was destroyed in the custody of state judicial authorities. . . . Authorities also failed to search the homes and offices of key suspects in the municipal police. Two bus drivers who witnessed clashes between the students and police were not interviewed by prosecutors until April 2015. The expert group concluded that multiple detainees suffered injuries caused by intentional abuse. A number of suspects told the experts that they were tortured by security agents. Moreover, the report reveals that federal prosecutors only focused on four buses carrying students, and did not investigate the possible link between the disappearances and a fifth bus carrying students. Federal authorities told the group that the fifth bus had been destroyed by students prior to the clashes with security forces–-a claim that, according to the international experts, was contradicted by multiple witnesses and the initial investigation by state-level authorities. The omission had ‘serious consequences’ for the investigation, as this bus is likely a ‘key element’ in the case” (). In the strongest possible terms, the authors of the report recommend that “Mexican authorities to redouble their efforts to bring those responsible for the enforced disappearances to justice, clarify the whereabouts of the disappeared students, and thoroughly investigate links between authorities and organized crime groups” (“Mexico . . .”).

Although this incident has attracted international attention because of the number of victims involved, “enforced disappearances by security forces are widespread in Mexico”: “Dozens of corpses and several mass graves were unearthed in Iguala during the course of the Ayotzinapa investigation. There are over 300 open investigations into alleged forced disappearances in the municipality of Iguala alone, according to the Attorney General’s Office. Nationally, more than 25,000 people are missing, according to an official national registry. As of April 2014, no one had been convicted of an enforced disappearance committed after 2006, according to official statistics” (“Mexico . . .”).

____________________

Cuba

The re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba has excited much interest among U.S. corporations about the new opportunities to develop markets in Cuba. Not surprisingly, colleges and universities have also been eyeing opportunities to create mutually beneficial linkages with Cuban institutions and even to expand into the island nation. And, given the state’s location and large population of Cuban emigres and exiles, it is hardly surprising that colleges and universities in Florida have been at the forefront in considering such opportunities. But beyond the obstacle of the now removed federal embargo of Cuba, institutions in Florida must contend with a 2006 state law that “prohibits Florida’s public universities and community colleges from using state funds, private donations, or grants for travel to any nation identified as a terrorist state by the U.S. Department of State, a list that also includes Iran, Sudan, and Syria; the target, however, was clear” (Fischer). Indeed, events seemed to conspire to reinforce the necessity of the legislation: “Months before the law was enacted, a Florida International University professor and his wife, also a university employee, were charged with spying for Cuba, inflaming an already hot-button issue. (The pair later pleaded guilty to somewhat lesser charges)” (Fischer). Indeed, although the ACLU challenged the law as an attack on faculty members’ First Amendment rights, the law was largely upheld, with only faculty members and students at private institutions being exempted from the state-imposed restrictions.

Both sides of the issue have been articulated succinctly by Eduardo J. Padrón, president of Miami Dade College, who “fled Cuba as a teenager. Padron “points out that Cuba remains an authoritarian country, where the government “maintains a tight grip” on universities, and academic freedom and free expression aren’t safeguarded” (Fischer). So, although Padron “believes that academic engagement is important to heal the rift between the two countries, . . . he’s still hesitant about striking partnerships with Cuban institutions unless academic and personal freedoms can assured” (Fischer).

____________________

Sources:

Fischer, Karin. “Détente with Cuba Offers Florida Colleges Opportunities–and Hurdles.” Chronicle of Higher Education 16 July 2015.

“Mexico: Damning Report on Disappearances.” Human Rights Watch 6 Sep. 2015.

Pena, Alfredo. “Mexican University Campus Shuttered over Gang Threats.” Yahoo News 23 Jan. 2015.

____________________

Previous Posts in the Series:

Post 1. Canada—University of British Columbia [Part 1]: https://academeblog.org/2016/04/24/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-1-of-a-series/.

Post 2. Canada—University of British Columbia [Part 2]: https://academeblog.org/2016/04/25/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-2-of-a-series/.

Post 3. Canada—University of New Brunswick: https://academeblog.org/2016/04/26/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-3-of-a-series/.

Post 4. Canada—Capilano University: https://academeblog.org/2016/04/30/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-4-of-a-series/

Post 5. Canada—Overview: https://academeblog.org/2016/05/05/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-5-of-a-series/

Post 6. Canada—Additional Items: https://academeblog.org/2016/05/08/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-6-of-a-series/.

Post 7. Australia– Nikolic, Powell, and Price: https://academeblog.org/2016/05/18/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-7-of-a-series/.

Post 8: Australia–Copenhagen Consensus Centre at Flinders University and Monash University Branch Campus in China: https://academeblog.org/2016/05/21/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-8-of-a-series/.

Post 9: New Zealand—Police and Government Interference in Academic Freedom, Tertiary Education Union and Association of Scientists: https://academeblog.org/2016/06/30/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-9-of-a-series/.

Part 10: United Kingdom, Part 1: Free-Speech Rankings, Issues in Higher Education, and the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act: https://academeblog.org/2016/08/17/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-united-kingdom-part-1-post-10-of-a-series/.

Part 11: Global Survey of Academic Freedom Issues in 2015: United Kingdom, Part 2: https://academeblog.org/2016/08/20/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-united-kingdom-part-2-post-11-of-a-series/.

Part 12: Global Survey of Academic Freedom Issues in 2015: United Kingdom, Part 3, Scotland: https://academeblog.org/2016/12/11/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-12-of-series/.

Part 13: Global Survey of Academic Freedom Issues in 2015: United Kingdom, Part 4, Northern Ireland: https://academeblog.org/2016/12/17/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-13-of-a-series/.

Part 14: Global Survey of Academic Freedom Issues in 2015: Continental Europe: https://academeblog.org/2016/12/18/global-survey-of-academic-freedom-issues-in-2015-post-14-of-a-series/.