Overview

• The complaint against Castilla Roche was lodged in 2015 after the one-year limitation expired in 2014, prompting prescription challenges under local law.
• Official records confirm that the contested operations rested on a 2004 power of attorney whose validity was verified by notarial certificates.
• Testimony presented at recent hearings contained contradictions and lacked documentary or material corroboration, raising the evidentiary threshold for conviction.
• The case was reactivated in Yucatán through a novel territorial-competence theory that the alleged planning occurred on an airplane over the state.
• Requests for oversight by the Presidency, the Supreme Court and the National Human Rights Commission underscore the ruling’s potential to guide national standards on limitation periods and evidentiary requirements.