Forensic Philosophy PDF

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/329402584
Forensic Philosophy: Clandestine Common Graves in Contemporary Mexico
Article · December 2018
CITATIONS READS
0 32
1 author:
Arturo Aguirre Moreno

Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla
56 PUBLICATIONS 13 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Redes sociales View project
Espacios de violencia View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Arturo Aguirre Moreno on 04 December 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

4/12/2018 Forensic Philosophy: Clandestine Common Graves in Contemporary Mexico – Reﬂexiones Marginales
Q i LOGIN (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/WP-LOGIN.PHP)
(https://2018.re exionesmarginales.com/)
ARTÍCULOS (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/NUMERO/NUMERO-48/NUMERO-48-ARTICULOS/)
NÚMERO 48 (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/NUMERO/NUMERO-48/)
Forensic Philosophy: Clandestine Common Graves in Contemporary

Mexico
ARTURO AGUIRRE MORENO (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/AUTHOR/ARTUROAGUIRREMORENO/), NOVEMBER 30, 2018 105 b
(http://www. luni.unam.mx/?
utm_source=Re exionesMarginales&utm_medium=Re exionesMarginales&utm_campaign=Re exionesMarginales&
k
https://2018.reﬂexionesmarginales.com/forensic-philosophy-clandestine-common-graves-in-contemporary-mexico/ 1/27
Abstract
This article explores contemporary violence in Mexico from the theoretical proposal of forensic philosophy. The
approach is from a spatial event: the clandestine common grave. It refers to twelve years of an intrahistory of
violence in the face of a con ict that has grown in lethal intensity, which requires the theoretical, as well as vital,
construction of a critical space on suffering experiences. A minimal analysis of comparative cultural theory of
life is carried out as a spatial structure of human production. Violence, within the framework of knowledge with a
philosophical approach emphasizes the basis of a space qualitatively constructed on social sufferings and the
disarticulation of links between the living, and of these with their dead.
Keywords: Con icts, Social Philosophy, Common Graves, Mexico, War against Drug Tra cking, Forensic
Philosophy.
Resumen
Este artículo explora la violencia contemporánea en México a partir de la propuesta teórica de la losofía
forense. Se aborda desde un evento espacial: la fosa común clandestina. Se re ere a doce años de una
intrahistoria de la violencia frente a un con icto que ha crecido en intensidad, lo que requiere la construcción
teórica y vital de un espacio crítico sobre experiencias de sufrimiento. Se realiza un análisis mínimo de la teoría
cultural comparativa de la vida como una estructura espacial de la producción humana. La violencia, en el marco
del conocimiento con un enfoque losó co enfatiza la base de un espacio construido cualitativamente sobre los
sufrimientos sociales y la desarticulación de los vínculos entre los vivos y de estos con sus muertos.
Palabras clave: Con ictos, losofía social, fosas comunes, México, Guerra contra el narco, Filosofía forense.
Theorical Proposal: Forensic Philosophy[1]
Is the conceptual exploration developed from the theoretical, technical and practical analysis of the “material
homicide violence” that occurs in contemporary Mexico?
This theorical proposal focuses on the interactionism of material violence that attends to social suffering, the
ontological denigration of the body in the brutality administered by the perpetrators, restores the public
dimension of mourning and the importance of death in an extreme fratricidal process of social hostility.
The target of the forensic philosophy is the contribution of critical elements for the legal, space-vital
(reterritorialization) and political recon guration of present-day Mexico. It aspires that homicide and execution,
as well as suffering —in massive dimensions and unprecedented intensities—, cease to be a topical issue in the
same measure in which the favorable valuation of living, the memory of injustices and the reduction total of the
homicidal death in Mexico.
Theoretical Development
Homicidal violence in public space is a problem that has grown in complexity in Mexico during the last 12 years,
since the extraordinary process of what was called the war against drug tra cking began[2] and was continued
under the nomination of the ght against organized crime by the Mexican Government authorities,[3] who
triggered the State’s material forces exponentially, after the formal forces (actors, institutions and the legal,
ministerial and con ict mediation dynamics) were overcome, in part by an accelerated state streamlining, typical
of the last three decades.[4]
In this way, these last 12 years show an intrahistory of violence in Mexico without glory, without heroes and
without end. Therefore, it is understandable that it is the recounting, rather than a goal or micro-story, which has
allowed us to advance in the a rmation that what we are living exceeds, by far, the categorial experiences that,
as a society and as academia, we had on hand to understand the intensi ed and unimaginable brutality of which
we Mexicans have been witnesses, victims and victimizers.
The absence of a theoretical construction on the way to manage the changes, life and death,[5] but also the
failure of hypotheses about the monopoly of force,[6] or the astringency of culture in relation to violent practices
against the living and dead body[7] are some facts that speak of the limitations that could previously go
unnoticed or be supported in the “academic branch”[8] that corrodes the universities of Mexico; but that
nowadays the retraction of thought before these facts only aggravates the device that is generated in the
complicity between knowledge, power and doing .[9]
In such a scenario, it should not be surprising, that statistics and news information are those that have taken the
lead role in these dozen years, to allow us to see what violence does,[10] when our criteria to question what
violence is fails. This has several reasons, but one could be that of the profound historical lack, at least in
philosophy, to think about contemporary violence in Mexico from an interpersonal damage approach, without
justi cations of the great history or structuralist and /or essentialist reductions, from constructs such as the
community, the State and the sociopolitical enmity, which were offered by Modernity to make violence a valid,
legitimate and/or recurring exercise.[11]
IMAGE BY MALCOLM LINTON, MÉXICO, 2013
Hence, to a large extent, we nd studies on violence necessary today, as frontier knowledge, directed towards the
development of situated knowledge, advanced and transformative, whose results contribute to the change and
emergence of concepts, which promotes new approaches, the same as new agendas of knowledge in the
understanding of violence. Knowledge that focuses its attention on agents, victims, factors, elements, multi-
purpose, multi-causal and multi-factual relationships.
Notice, that events of violence generate, from within, new agendas of research both individually and in groups,
because we are facing a map of activated terrors that increase not only in number, but also, their presence is
extended in more locations in México.[12] A sequence of coerced disappearances, massacres, lynchings,
femicides, human tra cking, forced displacements,[13] shows that which requests, or rather demands to be
contemplated.
In the following pages, we will deal with reiterated violence, whose deployment shows an intensely particular
registration code: with regards to clandestine graves. We speak of those graves found as well as others that
remain hidden, uncountable and unthinkable, which make the augmentation of the con ict self-evident, as well as
the transformation of executed violence, which in recent years has gone from rare incidents to the
systematization of power and control of public space through death.
EJIDO EL PATROCINIO, OCTOBER 2016. PHOTO BY SIN EMBARGO

JOURNAL
The records of clandestine graves in Mexico as a paralegal or illegal burial structure, promoted by territorial
control con icts amongst criminal organizations (that arranged complication and complicity of organized
criminal gangs, State powers and business organizations), has been a fractal constant in the course of the 21st
century. However, this second decade, which is not yet nished, is a turning point in this intra-history of violence;
because clandestine graves in their multitudinous dimensions, but above all, because of the reiterated violence,
have become a fact that is constantly present in the formation of the social space.
It should be noted that space is conceptualized here as a constructed space -meaning, that which is composed
and created in company with others- and must be thought from the very term of con-struere insofar as it cannot
be done by an isolated or lonesome individual.[14]
In fact, in the sphere of statistics and reports of clandestine graves, attention is drawn not only in the
quanti cation or its qualitative features, but in the geographical differentiation, and although the events seem
isolated through hundreds of kilometers between them, we speak of a politically limited geography between the
Suchiate River and the Rio Grande; places where the practice of violence is repeated over and over, despite
different factors, as well as reasons that can be enumerated to understand this problem.
In this sense, spatiality, in so far as structures of reference, are forms of correlation constructed to inhabit the
world: house, territory, border, city, and so on. This construction, this way of creating space, between, is the way
to be, to have and occupy a place as spatial realities that restore and reclaim space: a space that is built not only
with magnitude but also with the sensory, the voice, the moan, the smell, the auditory, as well as the proximity
and remoteness of others; therefore, space is not, in such way, a thing nished by others, but there are always
relationships that can be continued, not made or modi ed by an insistent heterogeneous and dynamic us that
makes space something common, as a shared form of being built.[15]
IMAGE BY MALCOLM LINTON, MÉXICO, 2013
Open to participatory intervention by the relationships and referentialities that it implies, then, the space facing
violence is altered in its center of referentiality, in the way of physically inhabiting space;[16] for no place, not
even our own place, is a simple construction, but a complex of links, networks, interactions and of spatial
practices exchanges. Thus, in clandestine graves, an act of force-damage is evident in its execution as an
organized and collective action, which modi es space, morphologically altering the spatial quality of the
experience. Let us refer to the fact that clandestine mass graves are, again, not the product of an isolated
individual, but part and sequence of a coerced disappearance scheme.
What are we talking about? In seven years, different punctual moments and concrete spaces of clandestine
graves in Mexico have highlighted the reiterability of this structure to create the outline of our country our
sorrowful space. From the period of 2007 to 2017, events that would su ce, each one by itself, [17] to form lines
of work (theoretical research and social, political and cultural action) have emerged among us; however, various
factors, actors and measures are those that intervene (either by deliberate action, by explicit resignation, or by
measures that allow controlling and enhancing the affect and right of public mourning in unsuspected social
dimensions).
MASS GRAVE IN VERACRUZ, MEXICO
This is the framework of unstable and chameleonic understanding (between speeches of epistemological,
anthropological, historical, legal, forensic, political, ethical and aesthetic nature) that unfolds in the sequence and
reiteration in the record of 1,143 graves; 3,230 bodies, present in 26 of the 32 states of the Republic, with
approximately 20% of the bodies of the victims being identi ed, as featured in the Missing Persons and
Clandestine Pits in Mexico Special Report between 2007 and 2016.[18] A report that comprises the period
opened by the declared war against drug tra cking and the ght against organized crime, and that clearly warns,
in itself, the limitations of its gures. In this way, the October 2016 report of the CNDH went through similar
obstacles to those which journalist Karla Zabludovsky had experienced at the beginning of 2015 in obtaining
truthful information, when she requested information from the 32 States on how many common graves there
were in their territory since December 2006. The result is clear in the title of Zabludovsky’s report, published in an
international media, in March 2015: “No one knows how many common graves there are in Mexico. Much less
the Government”.[19] On its part, the report of the CNDH emphasizes that some state governments did not
respond to the request for information from the agency, others did; given the lack of transparency, the agency
crossed the information with a hemerographic sample, which our journalist followed during the previous year and
a half: which allows us to provide approximate gures. But, with everything, and in fact, nobody knows how many
common graves there are in Mexico.
SEEKERS OF COLECTIVO SOLECITO (FROM LEFT TO RIGHT: MARTHA

GONZÁLEZ MENÉNDEZ AND ROSARIO SÁYAGO MONTOYA). THEY BURY
THE ROD IN DEPTH WITH HAMMER BLOWS, THEN EXTRACT IT AND IN
THE AROMA OF THE TIP OF THE INSTRUMENT THEY LOOK FOR THE
VICTIMIZED BODIES IN THE AREA OF ILLEGAL BURIAL.
THIS PHOTO WAS TAKEN IN THE HILLS OF SANTA FE, VERACRUZ, MAY
10, 2018.
PHOTO BY DANIEL BEREHULAK, THE NEW YORK TIMES.
Let us recall that, in the location of most of the mass graves, between 2011 and 2017, it has been mostly by
anonymous information that relatives and citizen initiatives have found the whereabouts of the graves mentioned
above. Giving evidence of the collusion, the limitation, and the inability of the authorities at all levels of
government and in all the powers that make up the grandiloquent “Supreme Power of the Union”.
Whatever the case, in the context of violent con icts, the question that arises is whether this systematization and
the high margins of damage evident in, produced, clandestine graves, are a worrying problem of insecurity or the
feature of a con ict of larger dimensions, which is not reduced to crime, but which is not clari ed as a process of
civil war. Not being by means of ideology neither aspirations of political revolt or religious con ict, the malicious
violence in the public space has characteristics of annihilation that operates from the hybrid generated by the
economic capitalization,[20] the generation of confusing information -when there is – the political uses of the
management of death and the retraction of the formal and material forces of the State in its governing bodies; all
fueled by structural breaks of the cultural approaches to the valuation of life, the benignity over the body and
condolence before the death of others.[21]
In this hybrid nature of violence from public security understanding frameworks or con ict approaches, we
consider it an option to meet the criteria of the Con ict Barometer of the Heidelberg International Con ict
Research Institute.[22]
Under the criteria of actors, measures and objects of con ict, the use of weapons, the actors involved, the
causes, the destructive and life-threatening scope are analyzed, which allows criteria to be generated on
intensities of con ict and levels of violence, considered as:
Low intensity non-violent con icts
1. Arguments
2. Non-violent crises
Medium intensity violent con icts
Violent crises
High intensity violent con icts
1. Limited War
2. War[23]
We are interested in calling attention, at this moment, that under this Barometer Mexico was considered in 2018
as the only country in all of America with a high intensity national violent con ict, that is, at war, due to the
indexes of participants in the con ict, by the type of weapons (light and heavy) used, by the number of
homicides, as well as the destruction of infrastructure, living spaces, economy and culture; generated by
intrastate con icts, involving state actors and organized groups (militia, police, ministerial, governors, etc.) and
sub-state con icts, in actions executed by civil or parastatal actors, which have produced a “limited war” under
the Heidelberg Barometer in the ght between cartels and criminal organizations.[24]
GLOBAL MAP OF CONFLICT BAROMETER OF THE HEIDELBERG

INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT RESEARCH INSTITUTE 2018.
In 2016 the reports of the CNDH (2016) and the UIA (2016) -as well as ourselves hazarded in I+D Magazine in
2015-[25] an attempt has been made to in uence the controversy and the con ict of speeches, on the spatial
production of said graves, through the creation of “recognition frameworks”[26] in which the clandestine grave is
now a core part of our argumentation on studies and critical analysis of violence. Thus, from the “clandestine
grave”, a term used by public security authorities to designate graves lled with the bodies of felons and
criminals,[27] we have moved on to the activation of the term “clandestine common grave” to point directly to the
produced and abandoned occlusion, as part of a reiterative process of violence in Mexico that activates both
criminal groups and sub-state groups, as well as government agents.
MAP OF CLANDESTINE GRAVES IN MÉXICO 2007-2016.

IMAGE BY EJE CENTRAL JOURNAL. EDITORIAL IN
HTTP://WWW.EJECENTRAL.COM.MX/PATROCINIO-CAMPO-DE-
EXTERMINIO/
These clandestine graves are a spatial and temporal transformation in the forms of violence, which not only
affects the material space, but also its scope of closer relationships and affective ties:[28] we are facing a
transformation that has repercussions on a dissemination that is unmatched by previous experiences of family
members, because spatial violence (such as the occurrence of the grave and the re ection itself on the forms of
violence) opens a scope of crucial problems to the understanding of the humane in current times, and points
directly to the singular irreplaceability, the uniqueness of each, therefore, the astonishing evidence that each
violent action rei es, eliminates and deprives our singular and plural existence of space.
What we seek to highlight, in this context, is the fact that common graves have been produced, and are an
integral part of a national violent con ict, whose highest percentage of executions occur by use of rearms. All
of which indicates that the various actors, measures and objects of con ict (strategic positions, narcotics,
human resources, natural resources or tra cking routes) produce dynamics of hostility, destruction and death in
indexes similar to those experienced in Syria or Afghanistan.
Given the emergence of so much exposed violence we must ask and de ne what is a common grave? According
to the UN it is an excavation that contains a multiple number of corpses, three or more.[29] However, here we
must clarify that common grave refers to the simplest form of burial, of which there are vestiges from 120,000
years ago.[30] Minimal attention allows us to understand that the grave -as a deliberate action of burial-
supposed a revolution in the human space. It was the collective creation of a speci c space, a hole, hollow,
concavity, incision and a place where bodies were deposited, often communally, as a continuity of the community
of the living.[31] Structural occlusion of the dead body on earth or stone, but also an intimate relationship
between spatialized memory and the affective bond in mourning, symbolized by inscriptions, funerary offerings
and other symbolic details. In this way the common grave represented the vertical, underground incision of
space in front of the horizontality of the landscape. A spatial infra-structure that not only required collective and
voluntary efforts for the burial, but also the endeavor of its maintenance. In other words, a grave in this context is
not only produced, but also taken care of and protected (pay attention to this tripartite signature of the grave,
which runs through the history of the hindermost necropolitics: production, care and protection).
In this setting it seems important to go back to the rst wonders of these spatial structures of the grave that are
precursors of the tumulus, the corridor, the sarcophagus, the crypt; given that in all of them, the technical and
symbolic capacity of the living to humanize the space of death is clear: nurturing a spatial-affective relationship
between living and dying, between populating and commemorating.
At this point attention should be directed to the following delimitation: what is a clandestine grave? A cavity
produced for the sake of spatial production under factors such as invisibility, anonymity and forgetfulness, a
structure not only outside the law (criminal) but also against the ow of the relationship between production,
care and protection of the dead. Similarly, far from the common grave dug in times of a health contingency
(which can put the physical and/or mental health of the community at risk before the scattering of epidemics or
natural disasters that the exposure of bodies may have an impact on mental health), as indicated by the World
Health Organization,[32] contemplating risky situations and insisting on the respectful treatment of the disposed
bodies at all times (that is, always in accordance with mortuary rites and customs, as well as with the informed
consent of the community, either in relation to burial or incineration processes).
MULTIPLE BURIAL, TONCONICAL GRAVE, TLALPAN MEXICO CITY, 2500

B.C. PHOTO BY MAURICIO MARAT, INAH
The clandestine mass grave produced by malicious violence must not be homologated with the hoyancada (also
enunciated as the huesa or hoya) that takes place in the civil space destined for it: the cemetery. In this case the
hoyancada —a term in Spanish that serves here to distinguish the clandestine mass grave that we analyze— is a
variation of the individual burial in a legitimate space, but in this case is available for the deposit of corpses that
cannot be identi ed nor are they claimed. The hoyancada is opened and closed to receive the bodies without a
name as part of its own infrastructural functions.
The concepts for referring to the graves found over and over in Mexico (in the period of 2007 to the present year),
before invoking and involving the grave as a generating event of social suffering and public mournings, was
marginalized into clandestinity, as part of the neutralization speeches of a war against organized crime that
failed, amongst other things, by extending its level of execution of State violence towards a randomness in civil
order (a lack of intelligence on behalf of the State in managing the force monopoly).
CLANDESTINE GRAVE WITH 8 CORPSES IN NAYARIT. FEBRUARY 13,

2018. PHOTO BY EFE
Thus, the term clandestine was part of a process of “immunization of violence” (Esposito, 2009: 109) as a
secondary moment to failure: a process of neutralization, in which the enemies were the narco and the
clandestine. To immunize the community: all this promoted by the instances of public security in the country and
applied through mass media; therefore, in researching records it will be possible to notice that between 2007 to
2015 the graves previously spoken of as common began to be spoken of as clandestine.
Let’s summarize up to here. The common grave that we think of is the clandestine common grave, that cavity
produced by the execution of the extreme violence that is homicide. The clandestine common grave is produced
by the burial of more than three deposited bodies, and at the same time, such an infra-structure is produced as
an act of collective coordination from the process of disappearance, homicide, transfer, opening of the cavity,
disposal of the bodies and occlusion of said earth cavity. In addition, it must be considered that not only is it an
integral part of an organized criminal process, but an exposure of a type of violence executed in the public space,
that is, of reiterated violence: violence that directly damages not only the grave victims, but also the order of vital
relationships that the situation of existence implies for each one (corporality-spatiality, temporality, co-relativity,
meaning, history, legality, etc.). That is, the excavation whose opening seeks the de nitive occlusion of the
bodies, as well as its oblivion in the common space, will have to count on the meditation of pain that is
constitutive (not derivative or sequential) of all acts of intentional homicidal violence, with the relationships and
edges of those pains produced, not only in the immediate suffering subject, but also in the consideration and
commotion of mourners that our relations extend to by our collective, human nexuses.
It is required, for that reason, to think of this event of the grave as a “broad conception of violence”, as called by
Vittorio Bufacchi,[33] which is not reduced to the exercise of the executed force of the perpetrators on the victim.
Violence in dimensions of spatiality and construction or destruction of space that we call “suffering space”: a
space created by the relationships and interactions of pain and debt, generated by malicious homicidal violence
that extends and intensi es between our spatial relationships in this which we call Mexico.
THIS IMAGE CHANGED THE PERSPECTIVE OF OUR ANALYSIS IN 2012,

BECAUSE IT SHOWS A SUFFERING EXPOSURE WHICH INTERLACE TO
THE DIFFERENT VICTIMS ALTERING THE SPACE IN ITS CONSTRUCTED
COMPLEXITY. PHOTO IN PROCESO REVIEW, EL SEXENIO DE LA MUERTE,
2012.
In this sense, we must return to the rst vestiges of common graves: they, as spatial practices of organization
and dynamism, show that the cavities and incisions in the earth have appropriate dimensions for the bodies that
inhabit them and are protective against the possibility of their trespassing. But beyond that, the graves express
the relationships, functions and discourses of what a human body can do. Their rhythms, their amplitudes and
frequencies, their samples and displays, allow us to know that the appropriation of space is given by the practice
of the body, and that the appropriation of the body is given by spatial practice. In short, in the grave the body
continues to claim space and it is the community of their own who propitiate it as an affective gesture, yes, of
love, honor and recognition, in its production, care and protection.
MICENIC CIST 1400-1300 B.C. PHOTO BY NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC
By contrast, the spatial infra-structure of intentional death that we face, the clandestine common grave, is a
reality that goes beyond not only our theoretical discursivities, within the sciences, but also our cultural
experiences. Because the common grave created by malicious violence brings into crisis homogeneous,
homoloidal, isotropic, continuous, three-dimensional concepts such as emptiness, latitude, form, but, also, it
questions us about space itself and about the spatial situation of our existence in relation to the earth as a
possibility of being intervened. To be a-terri ed, that is to say, deprived of that possibility is to be in a situation of
suspense where rhythms and spatial practices are reduced.
In this sense, we refer to the distortion generated by the discourse that ows, squirming in legal, political and
media jargon, a discourse that always arrives late in its limitations of what it cannot explain with criteria; or to the
one who exceeds the resources of the geometric and topological language from the clandestine common grave,
that is, the language that enunciates the clandestine common grave as a dump, as well as other emerging
gramemas such as narco-graves, narco-cemeteries, which neutralize the grieving space, because they refer to a
process of disquali cation and disregard of the body, life and death in the victims as well as their mourners.
The absolute violence or brutality that testi es to the intensi cation of each discovery of a clandestine common
grave in our near days, exposes the unacceptable suffering experienced by the torment and execution of which
the victims were subject to; in addition, it exposes again and again the con rmation that these graves are
productions that persevere in the frontal dissolution of individuality, the dislocation and the demolition of its
memory; as well as the twisting of the considerations on the constitutive vulnerability of which we are not only
mortal (as the Greek syllogism wanted) but we have become slavable in this country. Such modi cation is
warned against not only on the threshold of the deprivation of life, of death; but consists of an absolute
transmutation in which the corpse is at the same time instrument and object of debasement; transmutation that
the funeral rites, historical cultural gains, sought to contain, to slow down, in a gradual transition undertaken in
the disengagement of the other from this earth to go be between the earth and us, to be in-terred. Seminal
backgrounds of our common memory, which contrast with the occlusion, oblivion and disappearance of the
bodies, of our memory and of our ability to commemorate their death and their living.
ILLUSTRATION BY OLIVER McAINSH
The managing of killing is not reduced, therefore, to the materialization of taking life away, it extends to the
affective assessment of how we understand our relationships among the living, and of the living with the dead in
an extreme context of high intensity con ict, like the one that Mexico is at the center of right now. It would be
about, in any case, making a thorough revision of our body categories, spatial relationships of life and death, and
mourning.
One path that is proposed, a work hypothesis and a non-violence action path, in the face of clandestine graves is
the reprocessing and assumption of collective forms to do public mourning and mourn the loss produced by
homicidal violence (a mourning community); possibilities that were dismantled as a process of symbolic
colonization in the New Spain period,[34] being reduced to family processes and domestic spaces, typical of an
isolating modernity and inhibiting the public exhibition of pain.
FORENSIC WORKERS BURY ONE OF 40 UNIDENTIFIED BODIES AT THE

SAN RAFAEL CEMETERY IN CIUDAD JUÁREZ, CHIHUAHUA STATE,
MEXICO, ON JULY 23, 2018. PHOTOGRAPHY BY CARLOS SÁNCHEZ.
Clandestine common graves in Mexico, like other acts of malicious homicidal violence in the public space, are
part of a major problem that demands measures to identify bodies, revolutions in legal frameworks, demands to
political actors, accompanied by a frontal discussion where human sciences are points of critical attraction to
question, neutralize, evidence and counteract discourses that socially channel forms of normalization,
assumption or indifference to so much death and the inability to promote public mourning in the face of it.
To that end, and in contrast -as we have noted above-, the theoretical approach to the reiterability of the common
clandestine grave, a possible one, is given from the referential frame of the critical space that gives guidelines to
tend to the grave as an event of spatial interruption; which triggers considerations of the community from misery,
pain, debt and mourners, that is, from the suffering space, and which allows us to question what country, what
common land and territory can be built in the face of so much suffering and so many clandestine common
graves.
Final Considerations
Throughout this collaboration we have highlighted the context of high intensity con ict that its inhabitants have
been starring in Mexico for more than a decade. We tended to violence from a very particular spatial event: the
clandestine common grave; we paused to distinguish this spatial production from others that can hold
similarities (the “hoyancada” and common grave in case of health contingency); and in it, with a minimum
approach, by contrast, we notice the astonishing cultural and historical emergency in the genealogy of the
suffering void as a funeral process of estrangement from the dead in the production, care and protection of that
particular space that was the burial. Given this, the grave of which we speak, shows that its production
perseveres in the anonymity, abandonment and oblivion of the victimized. Added to this was the possibility of
opening the category of violence towards a broad conception: where the act of force-damage affects not only the
victim but also transgresses the affective relationships, the institutional, social and historical links that we
maintain as creators of spatial experiences. We offer some interpretation keys on the reiterability of violence that
intensi es and extends in our country, for which we identify this event as “clandestine common grave”; close to
the conceptualization that the most recent literature has provided in reports such as the CNDH (2016) and the
UIA (2016). Finally, we venture the possibility that, in the face of the clandestine common grave, a profound
revision of the notions of collective mourning, forgotten in an infused way by a process of symbolic colonization
in our cultural experiences, is needed; because in the face of the insistent repetition of murderous homicidal
violence in the public space, which are common clandestine graves, it would be necessary to think about
processes of interruption and non-repetition of this event as a construction of a culture of non-violence.
A MURDER VICTIM. PHOTOGRAPH: RODRIGO ABD/AP
Bibliography
1. Agamben, Giorgio, ¿Qué es un dispositivo?, Anagrama, Barcelona, 2015.

2. Aguirre, Arturo, Nuestro espacio doliente, reiteraciones para pensar en el México contemporáneo, Afínita,
México, 2016, in
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303838171_Nuestro_espacio_doliente_Consideraciones_ loso ca
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303838171_Nuestro_espacio_doliente_Consideraciones_ loso ca
3. Aguirre A. y Romero O., “Violencia expuesta, consideraciones losó cas sobre el fenómeno de la fosa
común”, Revista I+D, No. 9, Chiapas, pp. 82-107, in
http://www.espacioimasd.unach.mx/articulos/num9/espacioimad9_violencia_expuesta.php
(http://www.espacioimasd.unach.mx/articulos/num9/espacioimad9_violencia_expuesta.php), 2015.
4. Amnesty International, Informe 2016/17, Amnistía Internacional. La situación de los derechos humanos en
el mundo, Amnesty International, Londres, 2017.
5. Astorga, L., “Estado, drogas ilegales y poder criminal. Retos transexenales”, Letras Libres, No. 167, Ciudad
de México, pp. 1-6, in https://www.letraslibres.com/mexico/estado-drogas-ilegales-y-poder-criminal-retos-
transexenales. (https://www.letraslibres.com/mexico/estado-drogas-ilegales-y-poder-criminal-retos-
transexenales)
6. Bernstein, Richard, Pensar sin barandillas, Gedisa, Barcelona, 2015.
7. Bovero, Michelangelo, “Lugares clásicos y perspectivas contemporáneas sobre política y poder”, en Bobbio
N. et al., Origen y fundamentos del poder político, Grijalbo, México, 1985.
8. Bufacchi, Vittorio, “Dos conceptos de violencia”, en A. Aguirre (comp.), Estudios para la no-violencia I.
Pensar la fragilidad humana, la condolencia y el espacio común, 3 Norte-Afìnita, Puebla, 2015.
9. Butler, Judith, Precarious Life. The Power of Mourning and Violence, Verso, Brooklyn, 2006.
10. _______, Marcos de guerra. Las vidas lloradas, Paidós, México, 2010.
11. Calleja, Eduardo, La violencia en la política. Perspectivas teóricas sobre el empleo deliberado de la fuerza
en los con ictos de poder, CSIC, Madrid, 2012.
12. Cavarero, Adriana, Horrorismo: nombrando la violencia contemporánea, Anthropos-UAM, Barcelona, 2009.
13. Cavarero, A., Nombrando la violencia contemporánea, Anthropos, Barcelona, 2009.
14. Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos (CNDH), Informe especial de la Comisión Nacional de los
Derechos Humanos sobre desaparición de personas y fosas clandestinas en México, in
http://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/all/doc/Informes/Especiales/InformeEspecial_20170406.pdf
(http://www.cndh.org.mx/sites/all/doc/Informes/Especiales/InformeEspecial_20170406.pdf), 2016.
15. Escalante, Pablo, “La casa, el cuerpo y las emociones”, Historia de la vida cotidiana en México, Colmex,
México, 2004.
16. Esposito, Roberto, Comunidad, inmunidad y biopolítica, Herder, Barcelona, 2009.
17. Etienne, G. Krug et al., Informe mundial sobre la violencia y la salud, OMS, Washington D.C., 2002.
18. Franco, Jean, Cruel Modernity, Duke University Press, Durham, 2013.
19. Fuentes, Antonio, “Necropolítica y excepción. Apuntes sobre la violencia, gobierno y subjetividad en México
y Centroamérica”, en A. Fuentes, Necropolítica. Violencia y excepción en América Latina, BUAP, Puebla,
2012.
20. Graña, Daniel, “El llorar entre los nahuas y otras culturas prehispánicas”, Estudios de cultura Náhuatl, No.
40, Ciudad de México, 2003, pp. 155-174, en
http://www.historicas.unam.mx/publicaciones/revistas/nahuatl/pdf/ecn40/823.pdf
21. Gregory, Daniel al., Violent Greographies, Routledge, New York, 2007.
22. Guerrero, E., “¿Bajó la violencia?”, en Nexos, No. 444, México, 2015, pp. 21-28, in
https://www.nexos.com.mx/?p=24035 (https://www.nexos.com.mx/?p=24035)
23. Guilaine J. y Zammit J., El camino de la Guerra. La violencia en la prehistoria, Ariel, Barcelona, 2002.
24. Heidegger, Martin, Construir Habitar Pensar en Filosofía, Ciencia y Técnica, Universitaria, Santiago Chile,
2003.
25. Heidelberg Institute for International Con ict Research (HIIK), Con ict Barometer 2017, Heidelberg, HIIK,
2018 in https://www.hiik.de/en/kon iktbarometer/pdf/Con ictBarometer_2017.pdf
(https://www.hiik.de/en/kon iktbarometer/pdf/Con ictBarometer_2017.pdf).
26. Huffschmid, Anne, “Huesos y humanidad. Antropología forense y su poder constituyente ante la
desaparición forzada”, Athenea Digital, No. 3, Barcelona, 2015, pp. 195-214, in
http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenea.1565 (http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/athenea.1565)
27. Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), Índice de paz positiva, IEP, México, 2017.
28. Keane John, Re exiones sobre la violencia, Alianza, Madrid, 2000.
29. Lara, Catalina, “Fosas Clandestinas”, El universal, 2014, in
http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/gra cos/gra cosanimados14/EU_Fosas_Clandestinas/
(http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/gra cos/gra cosanimados14/EU_Fosas_Clandestinas/).
30. Lefebvre, Henry, La producción del espacio, Capitán Swing, Madrid, 2013.
31. Llorente, Marta, La ciudad: huellas en el espacio habitado, Acantilado, Barcelona, 2015.
32. Madrid, Antonio, La política y la justicia del sufrimiento, Trotta, Madrid, 2010.
33. Massey, Doreen, Un sentido global de lugar, Icaria, Barcelona, 2012.
34. Mazowiecki, T., “Annex I. Summary of the Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or
Arbitrary Executions on his Mission to Investigate Allegations of Mass Graves from 15 to 20 December
1992”, en Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia, 10 de febrero
de 1993, UN, New York, in http://repository.un.org/bitstream/handle/11176/212952/E_CN.4_1993_50-

EN.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
(http://repository.un.org/bitstream/handle/11176/212952/E_CN.4_1993_50-EN.pdf?
sequence=3&isAllowed=y)
Morbiato, C. “Prácticas resistentes en el México de la desaparición forzada”, Trace, No. 71, Ciudad de
México, 2016., pp. 137-164, in https://doi.org/10.22134/TRACE.71.2017.100
(https://doi.org/10.22134/TRACE.71.2017.100%0D)
36. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), Aplicación de las recomendaciones del Informe mundial sobre la
violencia y la salud, París, OMS, 2003, in http://apps.who.int/gb/archive/pdf_ les/WHA56/sa5624.pdf?
ua=1 (http://apps.who.int/gb/archive/pdf_ les/WHA56/sa5624.pdf?ua=1)
37. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), Informe sobre la violencia y la salud, Washington D.C., OMS,
2003.
38. Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS), Informe sobre la situación mundial de la prevención de la
violencia 2014, OPS, Washington D.C., 2016, in
https://oig.cepal.org/sites/default/ les/informe_sobre_la_situacion_mundial_de_la_prevencion_de_la_violenc
(https://oig.cepal.org/sites/default/ les/informe_sobre_la_situacion_mundial_de_la_prevencion_de_la_violenc
39. Ovalle, Lilian Paola et al., “Pensar la memoria desde la frontera: recuerdo, reconstrucción y reconciliación
en el caso del ‘pozolero’”, Contracorriente, 1, s.l., 2014, pp. 278-300, in
https://acontracorriente.chass.ncsu.edu/index.php/acontracorriente/article/download/1333/2248/
(https://acontracorriente.chass.ncsu.edu/index.php/acontracorriente/article/download/1333/2248/).
40. Pereda, Carlos, La losofía en México en el siglo XX. Apuntes de un participante, CONACULTA, México,
2013.
41. Editorial Proceso, El sexenio de la muerte, Proceso, Edición especial, ciudad de México, 2012.
42. Reguillo, Rossana, “De las violencias: caligrafía y gramática del horror”, Desacatos, No. 40, Guadajalara,
2012, pp. 36-46, in http://desacatos.ciesas.edu.mx/index.php/Desacatos/article/view/254/134
43. Riekenberg, M., Violencia segmentaria. Consideraciones sobre la violencia en la historia de América Latina,
Iberoamericana, Madrid, 2015.
44. Rodrigo, J., Una historia de la violencia. Historiografías del terror en la Europa del siglo XX, Anthropos-UAM,
México, 2017.
45. Rosenblatt, Addam, Digging for Disappeared. Forensic Science after Atroticy, Standford University Press,
California, 2015.
46. Salama, Pierre, “Informe sobre la violencia en América Latina”, Revista de Economía Institucional, No. 18, l.,
2008, pp. 81-102, in https://www.economiainstitucional.com/pdf/No18/psalama18.pdf
(https://www.economiainstitucional.com/pdf/No18/psalama18.pdf)
47. Sánchez, Vázquez, Adolfo, El mundo de la violencia, UNAM-Fondo de Cultura Económica, México, 1998.
48. Serrano de Haro A., Cuerpo vivido, Encuentro, Madrid, 2010.
49. Secretariado Ejecutivo del Sistema Nacional de Seguridad Pública (SESNSP), Informe de víctimas de
homicidio, secuestro y extorsión 2017, SESNSP, México, 2018, in
http://secretariadoejecutivo.gob.mx/docs/pdfs/victimas/Victimas2017_012018.pdf
(http://secretariadoejecutivo.gob.mx/docs/pdfs/victimas/Victimas2017_012018.pdf),
50. Staudigl, Michel, Phenomenologies of Violence (Vol. 1), Brill, Boston Mass., 2014.
51. Trejo, Guillermo. y Ley, Sandra, “Municipios bajo fuego”, Nexos, No. 444, Ciudad de México, 2015, pp. 30-37.
52. UIA, Violencia y terror. Hallazgos sobre fosas clandestinas en México, Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y
Promoción de Derechos Humanos-UIA, México, 2016, in
http://www.ibero.mx/ les/informe_fosas_clandestinas_2017.pdf
(http://www.ibero.mx/ les/informe_fosas_clandestinas_2017.pdf)
53. Villoro, Luis, De la libertad a la comunidad, Fondo de Cultura Económica, Madrid, 2001.
54. Waldenfels, B., “Habitar corporalmente el espacio”, en Daimón. Revista de losofía, No. 32, Madrid, 2004,
pp. 24-37, en http://revistas.um.es/daimon/article/view/15221/14681
55. World Bank, How Communities Manage Risk of Crimea and Violence, World Bank, Washington D.C. 2013.
56. World Health Organization (WHO), Disposición nal de los cadáveres después de una emergencia, Guía
técnica No. 8, WHO, l., 2009, in http://www.disaster-info.net/Agua/pdf/8-DisposicionFinalCadaveres.pdf
(http://www.disaster-info.net/Agua/pdf/8-DisposicionFinalCadaveres.pdf)
57. Zabludovsky, K., Nadie sabe cuántas fosas comunes hay en México. Mucho menos el gobierno, March 27,
California, 2015, in http://www.buzzfeed.com/karlazabludovsky/nadie-sabe-cuantas-fosas-comunes-hay-
en-mexico-mucho-menos-e#.gnB83alGb (http://www.buzzfeed.com/karlazabludovsky/nadie-sabe-
cuantas-fosas-comunes-hay-en-mexico-mucho-menos-e#.gnB83alGb)
Notas
[1] This paper is part of the project “Forensic Philosophy: Re ections on Space, the Body and Homicide in
Contemporary Mexico”, registered in the Postgraduate Program in Contemporary Philosophy of Benemérita
Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico.
[2] Fuentes Díaz, Necropolítica y excepción. Apuntes sobre la violencia, gobierno y subjetividad en México y
Centroamérica, pp. 34-38.
[3] Gutiérrez Guerrero, “¿Bajó la violencia?”, pp. 21-28.
[4] Villoro, De la libertad a la comunidad, p. 19.
[5] Butler, Precarious Life, pp. 19-49.
[6] Bovero, Lugares clásicos y perspectivas contemporáneas sobre política y poder, pp. 48-56.
[7] Reguillo, De las violencias: caligrafía y gramática del horror, pp. 36-46.
[8] Pereda, La losofía en México en el siglo XX. Apuntes de un participante, p. 323.
[9] Agamben, ¿Qué es un dispositivo?, p. 22.
[10] Cf. Proceso, “El sexenio de la muerte”, passim.; Trejo et al., “Municipios bajo fuego”, pp. 30-36.
[11] González Calleja, La violencia en la política, pp. 21-57.
[12] Up until December 2017, the criminal tra c light indicated that this year was the most violent year, with
19,057 homicides from January to November 2017. This indicates an increase of 23% in relation to 2016 (visit
http://www.semaforo.com.mx/Semaforo/Incidencia) (http://www.semaforo.com.mx/Semaforo/Incidencia)).
Recently with an average of 20.51 intentional homicides per 100 thousand inhabitants in Mexico in 2017 (total:
29,159 murders) (SESNSP, 2018), as a result of interpersonal violence, violent con icts by territory, violence
between gangs and murders (the fact that this violence is not motivated by political ideologies or religious, but by
the dispute of sources, networks and routes of economic-political capitalization is highlighted), we can speak of
an increase that returns to the gures of 2013, but that has extended to more municipal locations, 407 in 2016
(see the entry “ Deaths by homicide” in the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI), at
http://www.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/olap/proyectos/bd/continuas/mortalidad/defuncioneshom.asp?s=est).
[13] Amnesty International, La situación de los derechos humanos en el mundo, pp. 307-311.
[14] Massey, Un sentido global del lugar, p. 161.
[15] Lefebvre, La producción del espacio, pp. 129-132.
[16] Heidegger, Construir, habitar, pensar en losofía, p. 199.
[17] The reiteration of violence carried out in the spatial structure of the common grave can be supported by the
re-count of the following events: between 2010-2011 in the Municipality of San Fernando, Tamaulipas, 196
bodies were found in clandestine graves; in 2011 Tijuana was the star of the extraordinary clandestine grave, in
which bodies were counted by liters (17,500 liters approximately) in which between 300 and 650 bodies were
disintegrated by Santiago Meza, aka El pozolero; between 2011-2012 ve municipalities of Durango provide
information about having generated 15 common graves which contained 351 bodies; between 2013-2014 the
municipality of La Barca, Jalisco (on the border with Michoacán), between November and January, 74 bodies
were recovered when the search for two kidnapped federal policemen was undertaken; between 2014-2015 in
the municipality of Iguala, Guerrero, in the search for Ayotzinapa’s 43, 129 bodies were recovered from exposed
illegal burial sites thanks to the search brigades; in 2016 in the municipality of Tetelcingo, Morelos, we learned of
the clandestine common grave created between 2010-2013 under the illegal action of the State Attorney General
in which 119 bodies were buried; that same year, in the municipality of San Pedro de las Colinas, Coahuila, Ejido
el Patrocinio, the clandestine common grave created between 2007-2012 was exposed, and pinpointed by the
media as “an extermination camp”, in which the amount of bodies is undetermined due to the conditions of the
nding and by the slow processing of information of more than 4,500 skeletal remains. Finally, in this account of
the horror of this spatial structure, in 2017, Colinas de Santa Fe, Veracruz, was the place where 253 corpses were
recovered (to support these ndings see CNDH, 2016; UIA, 2016 and Zabludovsky, 2015).
[18] Cf. CNDH, Informe especial de la Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos sobre desaparición de
personas y fosas clandestinas en México, pp. 450-513.
[19] Cf. Zabludovsky, “Nadie sabe cuántas fosas comunes hay en México. Mucho menos el gobierno”, passim.
[20] Astorga, “Estado, drogas ilegales y poder criminal”, p. 3.
[21] Franco, Cruel Modernity, p. 25.
[22] Vid., Heidelberg Institute for International Con ict Research (HIIK), Con ict Barometer 2017.
[23] Ibid., pp. 7-9.
[24] Ibid., pp. 17-19.
[25] Vid. Aguirre et al., Violencia expuesta, consideraciones losó cas sobre el fenómeno de la fosa común,
passim.
[26] Butler, Marcos de Guerra. Las vidas lloradas, pp. 19-29.
[27] Lara et al., Fosas Clandestinas, passim.
[28] Rosenblatt, Digging for the Disappeared. Forensic Science after Atrocity, pp. 54-58.
[29] Mazowiecki, “Annex I. Summary of the Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or
Arbitrary Executions on his Mission to Investigate Allegations of Mass Graves from 15 to 20 December 1992”, pp.
59-60.
[30] Jean Guilaine et al., El camino de la Guerra. La violencia en la prehistoria, pp. 61-100.
[31] Llorente, La ciudad: huellas en el espacio habitado, pp. 65-67.
[32] World Health Organization (WHO), Disposición nal de los cadáveres después de una emergencia, passim.
[33] Bufacchi, “Dos conceptos de violencia”, pp. 21-22.
[34] Vid. Graña Behrens, “El llorar entre los nahuas y otras culturas prehispánicas”, passim. Also review
Escalante, “La casa, el cuerpo y las emociones”, pp. 255-260.
100
VECES COMPARTIDO
 Comparte (https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?
u=https%3A%2F%2F2018.re exionesmarginales.com%2Fforensic-philosophy-
clandestine-common-graves-in-contemporary-mexico%2F)
 Tuitea (https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?
text=Forensic%20Philosophy%3A%20Clandestine%20Common%20Graves%20in%20Contempo
philosophy-clandestine-common-graves-in-contemporary-mexico/)
TAGS : CONFLICTOS (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/CONFLICTOS/), FILOSOFÍA FORENSE

(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/FILOSOFIA-FORENSE/), FILOSOFÍA SOCIAL
(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/FILOSOFIA-SOCIAL/), FOSAS COMUNES

(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/FOSAS-COMUNES/), GUERRA CONTRA EL NARCO
(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/GUERRA-CONTRA-EL-NARCO/), MÉXICO
(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/MEXICO/)
SIGUIENTE ARTÍCULO
La portabilidad y la movilidad
(https://2018.re exionesmarginales.com/la-portabilidad-y-la-movilidad/)
h
ARTÍCULO ANTERIOR
Emergencia del ciudadano en el discurso jurídico mexicano del siglo XIX

(https://2018.re exionesmarginales.com/emergencia-del-ciudadano-en-el-discurso-juridico-mexicano-del-
siglo-xix/)
(https://2018.re exionesmarginales.com/author/arturoaguirremor
(Https://2018.Reflexionesmarginales.Com/Author/Arturoaguirremoren
o/)
ARTÍCULOS RELACIONADOS
TATIANA AGUILAR-ÁLVAREZ BAY (HTTPS:/… NATALIA QUEZADA (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXI… FERNANDO SALAZAR TORRES (HTTPS://201…
(https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale

habitar-poetico-y-la-enfermedad/) art-el-nuevo-arte-que-nos-hara- condesa-sangrienta-la-mujer-a-
despertar/) traves-del-discurso-clinico-y-las-
El habitar poético y la
practicas-corporales-de-lo-moral/)
enfermedad Street Art, el “nuevo” arte que
(https://2018.reflexionesmargin nos hará despertar La Condesa sangrienta, la mujer
ales.com/el-habitar-poetico-y- (https://2018.reflexionesmargin a través del discurso clínico y
la-enfermedad/) ales.com/street-art-el-nuevo- las prácticas corporales de lo
DANIEL CABALLERO LÓPEZ (HTTPS://2018.R… arte-que-nos-hara-despertar/)
GIOVANNI FESTA (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXION… PABLO RODRÍGUEZ NATAREN (HTTPS://201…
moral
(https://2018.reflexionesmargin
ales.com/la-condesa-
sangrienta-la-mujer-a-traves-
del-discurso-clinico-y-las-
practicas-corporales-de-lo-
moral/)
(https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale

papel-de-la-teleologia-dentro-del- condicion-inorganica/) y-el-derecho/)
discurso-eidetico-de-platon/)
View publication stats
El papel de la teleología dentro La condición inorgánica. Marx y el derecho

del discurso eidético de Platón (https://2018.reflexionesmargin (https://2018.reflexionesmargin
(https://2018.reflexionesmargin ales.com/la-condicion- ales.com/marx-y-el-derecho/)
ales.com/el-papel-de-la- inorganica/)
teleologia-dentro-del-
discurso-eidetico-de-platon/)
BUSCAR
Search 2
ESTA REVISTA ES POSIBLE GRACIAS A LOS PROYECTOS: PAPIIT IN-402911 Y 403214

Forensic Philosophy PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Forensic Philosophy PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Forensic Philosophy: Clandestine Common Graves in Contemporary Mexico

Article · December 2018

Arturo Aguirre Moreno

Redes sociales View project

Espacios de violencia View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Forensic Philosophy: Clandestine Common Graves in Contemporary

Theorical Proposal: Forensic Philosophy[1]

IMAGE BY MALCOLM LINTON, MÉXICO, 2013

EJIDO EL PATROCINIO, OCTOBER 2016. PHOTO BY SIN EMBARGO

IMAGE BY MALCOLM LINTON, MÉXICO, 2013

MASS GRAVE IN VERACRUZ, MEXICO

SEEKERS OF COLECTIVO SOLECITO (FROM LEFT TO RIGHT: MARTHA

Low intensity non-violent con icts

Medium intensity violent con icts

High intensity violent con icts

GLOBAL MAP OF CONFLICT BAROMETER OF THE HEIDELBERG

MAP OF CLANDESTINE GRAVES IN MÉXICO 2007-2016.

MULTIPLE BURIAL, TONCONICAL GRAVE, TLALPAN MEXICO CITY, 2500

CLANDESTINE GRAVE WITH 8 CORPSES IN NAYARIT. FEBRUARY 13,

THIS IMAGE CHANGED THE PERSPECTIVE OF OUR ANALYSIS IN 2012,

MICENIC CIST 1400-1300 B.C. PHOTO BY NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC

ILLUSTRATION BY OLIVER McAINSH

FORENSIC WORKERS BURY ONE OF 40 UNIDENTIFIED BODIES AT THE

A MURDER VICTIM. PHOTOGRAPH: RODRIGO ABD/AP

1. Agamben, Giorgio, ¿Qué es un dispositivo?, Anagrama, Barcelona, 2015.

de 1993, UN, New York, in http://repository.un.org/bitstream/handle/11176/212952/E_CN.4_1993_50-

TAGS : CONFLICTOS (HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/CONFLICTOS/), FILOSOFÍA FORENSE

(HTTPS://2018.REFLEXIONESMARGINALES.COM/ETIQUETAS/FILOSOFIA-SOCIAL/), FOSAS COMUNES

Emergencia del ciudadano en el discurso jurídico mexicano del siglo XIX

(https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale

(https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale (https://2018.re exionesmarginale

El papel de la teleología dentro La condición inorgánica. Marx y el derecho

ESTA REVISTA ES POSIBLE GRACIAS A LOS PROYECTOS: PAPIIT IN-402911 Y 403214

Вам также может понравиться