ABSTRACT
Disappearances in the context of Mexico’s ‘war on drugs’ are committed by state agents and non-state actors, most prominently organised criminal groups. From the perspective of International Human Rights Law, disappearances committed by non-state actors are enforced disappearances if committed with the authorisation, support or acquiescence of state agents. This chapter examines the question of whether a legal argument could be made that all disappearances in the current Mexican context should be considered enforced disappearances on the basis of acquiescence, due to the pervasive impunity that surrounds virtually all disappearance cases. Based on current applicable jurisprudence, I argue that while impunity certainly incentivises the perpetuation of disappearances, it is unlikely that it alone could be used as a basis for establishing acquiescence. Rather, acquiescence could be based on the failure of the authorities to take effective measures to dismantle organised criminal groups, which would encompass not just the generalised impunity, but also the failure of the authorities to take preventive measures.
