Femicide in Mexico: Over 3,000 Women Murdered in a Single Year

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: Tres Mujeras Hermosas - joey zanotti

Mexico's femicide crisis is one of the most severe in the Western Hemisphere. Over 3,000 women and girls were murdered in 2024 — the SESNSP recorded 827 cases formally classified as femicide and 2,300+ additional women killed in homicides not yet reclassified. Furthermore, Mexico's femicide rate represents only the most extreme end of a broader spectrum of gender-based violence: domestic violence, sexual assault, forced disappearance, and trafficking. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in González and Others v Mexico ("Campo Algodonero," 2009), held Mexico responsible for failure to protect women from gender-based violence. As a result, Mexico's femicide crisis is judicially recognised — yet has continued unabated. This article examines the patterns, judicial framework, and asylum implications.[1]

For context, see Mexico human rights report.

What Is Femicide?

Femicide is the gender-based killing of women — killing motivated by misogyny or by the victim's status as a woman. Article 325 of Mexico's Federal Penal Code defines femicide as the killing of a woman where one of seven gender-related circumstances applies (e.g., evidence of sexual violence, body left in public, prior threats by perpetrator). Furthermore, all 32 Mexican states have similar provisions in their criminal codes. The Inter-American framework, particularly the Belém do Pará Convention (1994), establishes state obligations to prevent, punish, and eradicate violence against women. As a result, Mexico has a formal legal framework — but enforcement is severely lacking.[2]

The Scale: 10 Women Killed Each Day

Approximately 10 women are killed in Mexico every day. In 2024, the SESNSP (Executive Secretariat of the National Public Security System) recorded 827 femicides and 2,310 women killed in homicides (some of which would be reclassified as femicide on full investigation). Furthermore, the femicide rate is not evenly distributed: Estado de México, Veracruz, Mexico City, Jalisco, Nuevo León, and Chiapas have the highest absolute numbers. The crisis has not improved despite political attention. As a result, Mexico's femicide rate per 100,000 women is among the highest in Latin America. Therefore, women in Mexico face a generalised risk of gender-based killing that varies by region but is everywhere significant.[3]

Judicial Framework: Campo Algodonero and SCJN

Mexico's judicial framework on femicide has been shaped by landmark decisions. Inter-American Court: González and Others v Mexico ("Campo Algodonero," 2009) — Mexico responsible for failure to protect three women killed in Ciudad Juárez; established the doctrine of due diligence to prevent and investigate violence against women. Supreme Court of Justice (SCJN): Mariana Lima Buendía (2015) — requires gender-perspective investigation of women's deaths; Karla Pontigo (2018) — affirmed and expanded gender-perspective duty. Furthermore, the SCJN has held that initial classification of a woman's death as "suicide" requires rigorous investigation before being accepted. As a result, the law is well-developed; enforcement is the problem.[4]

"The Court finds that the violence against women in Ciudad Juárez has a context of impunity that fosters its repetition. The State has the obligation to combat such impunity by all available means."Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Campo Algodonero v Mexico (2009)

Impunity

Impunity is the defining feature of Mexico's femicide crisis. Estimates of the conviction rate for femicide range from 5% to 10%. Furthermore, many cases are never properly investigated, classified incorrectly (e.g., as suicide), or closed without resolution. Investigative deficiencies include: failure to preserve crime scenes; failure to interview suspects; failure to follow up evidence; victim-blaming attitudes; outright corruption. As a result, perpetrators face minimal consequences and femicide functions as an effective method of violence against women. Therefore, the impunity rate itself constitutes evidence that state protection is not adequate for women in Mexico.[5]

Categories of Risk

Mexican women at heightened risk of femicide include: domestic violence survivors (perpetrator is typically intimate partner or ex-partner); women in cartel-affected regions (cartel members may target women associated with rival members); journalists and activists; LGBT+ women; indigenous women in rural areas; sex workers; women whose family members are involved with cartels. Furthermore, intersectional factors (race, sexual orientation, age, occupation) compound risk. As a result, women's asylum claims based on femicide risk are often individualised — addressing the specific factors increasing risk for the applicant. Therefore, country expert reports should engage with the applicant's specific profile, not just the general femicide statistics.[6]

State Protection

State protection for Mexican women facing femicide risk is generally inadequate. Despite the federal General Law on Women's Access to a Life Free of Violence (2007), provincial implementation varies widely. Furthermore, restraining orders are often issued but rarely enforced; shelters are limited and often full; police response is slow and frequently dismissive. As a result, women who report violence often face: re-victimisation; retaliation by the abuser; family pressure to withdraw. Therefore, the Horvath test for sufficiency of state protection is generally not met for Mexican women at risk of femicide.[7]

Internal Relocation

Internal relocation for Mexican women fleeing femicide risk faces multiple obstacles. (1) Cartel-related risks track women across regions. (2) Domestic violence perpetrators may locate moved women. (3) Economic vulnerability of single women in new locations is severe. (4) Cultural pressure for women to remain with extended family. (5) Lack of effective shelter or relocation programmes. Furthermore, the UNHCR Gender Guidelines (GIP-01) require that relocation be both safe and reasonable, including consideration of cultural and economic factors. As a result, internal relocation findings in Mexican women's claims should be carefully challenged.[8]

Asylum Implications

Mexican women's asylum claims engage: particular social group — most commonly; the specific PSG formulation depends on facts (e.g., "Mexican women unable to leave their relationships" or "women in Mexico"); imputed political opinion — in some cases; subsidiary protection for high-violence regions. US case law on domestic violence PSG (Matter of A-B-, Matter of A-R-C-G-) has been turbulent — 2018 Sessions decision restricted; 2021 Garland decision restored. UK case law applies HJ (Iran) and SSHD v Fornah principles. As a result, Mexican women's asylum claims are well-grounded in Convention law but require careful jurisdiction-specific analysis. Therefore, specialist representation is essential.[9]

Conclusion: A Recognised but Unresolved Crisis

Mexico's femicide crisis is recognised judicially, statistically, and politically — yet has continued for over two decades. Furthermore, the combination of high femicide rates, ~95% impunity, and inadequate state protection makes Mexican women asylum claims among the most evidentially robust gender-based claims globally. As a result, decision-makers should approach these claims seriously and the femicide statistics should be treated as definitive country evidence. Therefore, asylum systems serve a critical protection function for Mexican women.