The CNDH attacked the writer Sabina Berman for an article about Stone Rosary; He calls it “false progressive”, “false” and even “low”.
The above, through its pronouncement CNDH/DGDDH/036/2024 in which he points out that there are public figures who need to be unmasked because they confuse him with his alleged “progressive” profile, which makes his expressions even more devious and more cowardly.
In it extensive document responds to Berman’s questions - in an article published in a national media outlet – that the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) does not defend the victims, but rather the power, and that its appointment was due to the Army, and not by a decision of the head of the Federal Executive, former President López or the Morena legislators.
You might be interested in: Taddei meets with Morenistas from the Chamber of Deputies
“It does force us to ask him directly: What are you talking about? Where is your evidence? Do you have them? And if so, let them present them, not seek to pressure them with fanciful narratives that arise, like many others, from their philias and phobias, but not from reality.”
“They would like to see the Army identified by the CNDH as the greatest violator of human rights or for it to be said, as some say, that we are in a repressive militarism worse than that of the two previous six-year terms. Only that’s not the case.”
At the same time, the Commission insists that its recently endorsed head is the victim of “a violent disqualification campaign“, which – according to the text – does not attack Piedra Ibarra but rather “human rights.”
You might be interested in: INEHRM opens call for Young Researchers 2025
Due to the above, he accuses that the writer’s text is riddled with misinformationand interpretations that do not “reflect the reality of the work of the CNDH” under the direction of the daughter of the historical founder of the “Eureka” Committee.
And for this reason, the autonomous body will have the power to question Berman in the following way:
“To the opinion-makers—like her—who question without evidence, we ask I respect to the public and commitment to the truth. To the victims, to all the people of Mexico, to whom we are indebted, we reaffirm our absolute commitment to their cause and to the unrestricted defence of the human rights of all, without exclusion.”
MSA
Related
How can human rights organizations like the CNDH regain public trust after controversies?
Interview: Unpacking the CNDH Controversy with Human Rights Expert Dr. Elena Soto
Time.news Editor (TNE): Welcome, Dr. Soto! Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent controversy surrounding writer Sabina Berman and her article on the “Stone Rosary,” which has drawn sharp criticism from the National Human Rights Commission, known as CNDH.
Dr. Elena Soto (ES): Thank you for having me. This is a critical issue that highlights the dynamics of power and accountability in our society.
TNE: Absolutely! Berman’s article seems to have struck a nerve with the CNDH, which labeled her a “false progressive” among other criticisms. What do you think prompted such a strong response?
ES: It’s clear that Berman’s piece challenged the legitimacy of the CNDH’s role in defending human rights. By questioning their motives and their alignment with power rather than victims, she exposed an uncomfortable truth for the commission. When organizations like the CNDH feel their credibility is at stake, they often lash out defensively.
TNE: In their pronouncement, the CNDH suggests that some public figures are using a “progressive profile” to mask their true intentions. Is this a common issue in political discourse?
ES: Yes, this is quite common. When individuals or organizations present themselves as advocates for progressive ideals but fail to act on those principles, it creates a façade that can mislead the public. The CNDH seems to be claiming that Berman’s credentials are misleading which raises questions about who can genuinely champion human rights.
TNE: The extensive document released by the CNDH argues that it is not defending victims, but rather protecting power. What implications does this have for public trust in human rights organizations?
ES: This is alarming. If a human rights body is perceived as aligning more with state power than with the people it is tasked to protect, it risks losing public trust. A decline in confidence can deter victims from seeking help and can create a chilling effect on free speech, where critics fear retaliation.
TNE: Berman’s article urges the CNDH to provide evidence for its accusations against her. Why is evidence-based discourse crucial in discussions about human rights?
ES: Evidence is the cornerstone of credibility. In human rights advocacy, claims must be substantiated to hold weight. When organizations or individuals make serious allegations, especially against public figures or institutions, it is their responsibility to back those claims with solid proof. Otherwise, we risk entering a realm of baseless accusations that can be damaging to all parties involved.
TNE: The public’s response to such accusations can shape the narrative around these organizations, right?
ES: Exactly. Public perception can sway the effectiveness and authority of human rights organizations. If they are seen as part of the problem rather than the solution, it can lead to disillusionment not just with the CNDH, but with other entities claiming to advocate for justice and rights. Engagement with the public needs transparency and accountability.
TNE: what do you think the CNDH needs to do to restore its credibility in light of this controversy?
ES: The CNDH must prioritize transparency and accountability. They should engage in open dialog with critics, provide a platform for marginalized voices, and demonstrate genuine commitment to human rights rather than mere institutional self-preservation. Rebuilding trust will require consistent effort and a willingness to be held accountable for their actions.
TNE: Thank you, Dr. Soto, for your insights today. This conversation sheds light on the complexities of human rights advocacy and the real stakes involved. We appreciate your time.
ES: Thank you for having me. It’s vital to discuss these issues openly as we navigate the challenges to human rights in our society.