The former director of Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), Carlos Alberto Treviño Medina, criminally denounced the Attorney General of the Republic (FGR), Alejandro Gertz Manero, and one of the prosecutors who has also been one of the people closest to him, Juan Ramos Lópezby alleged acts of torture to obtain statements by the former director of the parastatal, Emilio Lozoya Austin (locked up for acts of corruption during his administration) who accused him in a complaint of facts.
The complaint addressed to the FGR human rights prosecutor, Sandra Irene Herrerías Guerra, emphasizes that the FGR offered undue benefits and pressured Lozoya Austin himself and his family through threats and accusations to get him to sign false claim ‘voluntarily’, which was demonstrated by the omission of all the authorities to apply the Law for the Protection of Persons Involved in Criminal Procedure”.
They also mention what was recently revealed with the leaked audios about the conversations between Gertz Manero and Emilio Lozoya Thalmannreiterating that “they were forced to revoke and change the defender they trusted and to desist from requests for amparo due to the fear of being detained.”
“Degrading, I denounce publicly proven facts constituting crimes whose investigation is the responsibility of that Special Prosecutor for Human Rights, which have been and continue to be committed by ALEJANDRO GERTZ MANERO, head of the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic, JUAN RAMOS LÓPEZ, Prosecutor for Competence Control of the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic, as well as WHO or WHO are responsible and derived from which my defendant CARLOS ALBERTO TREVIÑO MEDINA has the character of being offended for having been the object of false accusations as a consequence of the acts of torture perpetrated directly against Mr. EMILIO RICARDO LOZOYA AUSTIN and his next of kin”indicates an excerpt from the complaint.
The document also indicates that on July 15, the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) considered the proceeding against Lozoya Austin as torture, which was resolved in amparo 807/2020.
And they emphasize that Lozoya Austin was tortured to declare false information in order to establish a complaint of facts that, among other people, directly affected Carlos Treviño, as he was mentioned in the accusations obtained.
“Mr. EMILIO LOZOYA AUSTIN has been the victim of torture perpetrated directly by the Head of the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic and the false statements obtained against Mr. CARLOS ALBERTO TREVIÑO MEDINA give him the character of being offended with respect to said crime.”
Similarly, based on the definition of torture found in the Mexican legal framework, they argue that this practice does not only consist of physical abuse, but also that pressure to make established statements also counts within that concept. And, on the other hand, they also emphasize that the result of torture practices cannot be used as material for criminal charges.
Precisely, Javier Coello Trejo, who was Lozoya Austin’s lawyer until weeks before his extradition was announced, commented to Infobae that this had no reason to exist and, on the contrary, they did not have the necessary elements to exercise that remedy against their former client. But now it is known that the return of the former director of Pemex was agreed with the FGR under the supposed promise that the accused would not set foot in prison.
“Having deprived Mr. EMILIO LOZOYA AUSTIN of the right to an adequate defense and forcing him through pressure to sign a complaint of false facts, it is evident that his will was totally at the mercy of that Attorney General of the Republic and that he signed, so that: 1 ) the pressures will cease and 2) the privileges will continue. That is torture,” the complaint says.
Among what Lozoya declared, which the FGR would have taken from him, are statements against Carlos Treviño, which are considered by his defense as “falsehoods.”
However, it would be the FGR itself that would be in charge of investigating these facts, and since the defendant is the owner of the same, Treviño’s defense rules out that the case has due impartiality. For this reason, they add, they will also present this complaint to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
Finally, it is clarified that the complaint does not seek to victimize the figure of Emilio Lozoya or deny that he had received bribes to make the statements he made. He also does not try to pretend that because he is a victim of torture he has not committed the crimes for which he is being investigated. What they denounce, they reiterate, is the irreparable and incalculable damage to Carlos Treviños and the other people who were accused “falsely by Mr. Emilio Lozoya Austin.”