X-Ray of Impunity – Sexual Violence in the Barracks

BY Zorayda Gallegos
June 9, 2025    |    THIS STORY WAS SUPPORTED BY

Shielded by the physical, political, and symbolic barriers that protect the activities of the armed forces in Mexico, the sexual violence perpetrated against women in the military is little known, widespread, systemic, and enjoys impunity.

Governed by the principles of obedience and subordination, the daily lives of many women in the Secretariat of National Defense take on oppressive overtones when they find themselves in situations where commanding officers and military superiors commit acts of sexual aggression against them.

Although there is a significant number of unreported cases, the official figures speak volumes: in the past 12 years, the Military Prosecutor's Office has opened 525 investigations into rape, harassment, sexual abuse, and assault. Yet, the conviction rate is exceedingly low: only three out of every 100 cases result in justice for the victims.

This rate drops even further when it comes to high-ranking officers: none of the dozens of generals accused have been convicted. They are either acquitted, or their cases remain trapped in a judicial labyrinth and limbo for years.

This investigation documents the scope and depth of sexual violence within the Army, the impunity surrounding it, the justifications provided by military courts to absolve and excuse these crimes, and the harassment and intimidation faced by women who choose to come forward and file complaints, despite the numerous institutional obstacles.

A review of 50 investigations by the Army's Internal Control Body, two dozen legal case files, interviews with assaulted female soldiers, and complaints filed with the Office for the Attention of Harassment and Sexual Abuse (known in Spanish as HAS)—as revealed in emails leaked by the hacktivist group Guacamaya—paints a picture of an institution steeped in a culture of sexism that tolerates and conceals violence against the women within its ranks.

None of them are safe in the barracks.

Testimonials

In Spanish


Adarely

Eugenia

Isabel

Martha

Naybeth

Investigations

PART I

Generals Without Punishment

Twelve Years of Desolating Impunity
 

READ MORE

PART II

No Woman is Safe in the Barracks
 

READ MORE

PART III

Protection for the Military Elite

The Case of the General accused of Assaulting and Raping Female Recruits

READ MORE

The research process for this report faced various challenges. The most difficult part was persuading female military personnel who were victims of sexual violence to share their testimonies. There were also numerous obstacles in tracking the judicial follow-up of cases involving high-ranking military officers accused of sexual crimes, due to the secrecy that prevails within the Armed Forces. 

From the outset, approximately twenty women who had reported being victims of some form of gender-based violence were contacted and invited to be interviewed. Although conversations were held with at least twelve of them via email, text messages, and social media, only six ultimately agreed to provide their testimonies—five of them anonymously. The rest either stopped responding or declined to be interviewed due to fears that their communications might be monitored or that they could be identified and face retaliation against themselves or their families. 

These six testimonies were crucial to understanding how the patriarchal hierarchical structure operates to pressure, threaten, and silence women who decide to report the abuses committed against them. They also helped identify the obstacles victims face in seeking justice and the repercussions they endure after speaking out against their perpetrators. 

The testimonies of the six interviewees were supplemented with other documents, such as complaints sent to the HAS office, disciplinary proceedings before the Internal Control Body (known in Spanish as OIC), emails requesting assistance sent to various institutions, screenshots of chat messages, and official records of medical and psychological attention. Other documents included legal filings for injunctions, court rulings, and ministerial statements found in judicial files. Some of these materials were obtained through transparency requests, while others were sourced from the Guacamaya leaks.

The investigation is also based on previously unpublished data and documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, including: 

  •  Statistics on complaints and reports of sexual harassment and assault submitted to the Office for Addressing Sexual Harassment, which is under the Directorate General of Human Rights. 
  • Statistics on disciplinary proceedings handled by the Internal Control Body (OIC) of the Ministry of Defense (known in Spanish as Sedena). 
  • Statistics on military personnel involved in investigations into sexual crimes and on criminal cases processed by the Military Attorney General's Office. 
  • Statistics on case files with verdicts from military control courts, military oral trial courts, and the Military Superior Court. 
  • Statistics and rulings from injunction proceedings handled by various judicial bodies of the Federal Judiciary.

How were the disciplinary investigation files obtained? 

Public versions of some of the complaints and reports that led to disciplinary proceedings before the OIC were requested. Initially, the OIC provided documents summarizing the reported incidents, redacting only victims' names and personal information. However, when further documents were requested, the OIC refused to deliver the rest. After winning several appeals before the National Institute for Transparency (known in Spanish as INAI), which ordered Sedena to release the files, the agency provided illegible documents. Faced with this obstacle, the decision was made to search for these files in the Guacamaya leaks, where some of the complaints were found using the disciplinary procedure codes previously obtained through information requests. 

This strategy allowed access to approximately fifty complaint documents submitted to the OIC and the HAS office. Reviewing these documents helped identify various modus operandi, including threats to dissuade victims from filing complaints or pressuring them to leave the institution. Some of these cases were selected to illustrate the sexual and gender-based violence that women face. To avoid further risk or vulnerability for the complainants, information that could identify or re-victimize them was carefully excluded. 

How were the judicial case files obtained? 

Requests for case files with rulings on military personnel implicated in sexual crime investigations were submitted via transparency requests to several Sedena agencies, including the Military Attorney General's Office, regional military courts, and the Military Justice Tribunal. However, Sedena refused to release them. As a result, the documents were searched for in the Guacamaya leaks and cross-referenced with information from various courts and tribunals of the Federal Judiciary, which had received dozens of cases seeking legal protection through injunctions. 

Reading these judicial rulings revealed the difficulties victims faced in seeking justice, such as being prevented from seeing a doctor to certify their health after an assault and the sexist arguments military judges used to justify verdicts that ignored gender-sensitive legal standards. 

Using the statistical data provided, several databases were created to present a comprehensive overview, including previously unpublished figures from 2013 to 2024, of the administrative and criminal processes triggered by sexual violence complaints. Moreover, the detailed accounts from the complaints and the victims' testimonies reveal a bleak and largely unknown scenario of gender-based violence within various military facilities, where the perpetrators are mostly high-ranking officers. 

Sedena's protocol for addressing sexual harassment cases was also reviewed, along with the role of the institutions responsible for supporting victims. The analysis and interviews revealed that there is no standardized procedure—only a fragmentation of responsibilities that hinders access to justice.