Since the establishment of the guarantee system in Mexico, proclaimed by the constitutional reform in criminal matters that took place in 2008, the rights of the victim as the subject of state protection were reaffirmed. To this end, the General Law on Victims was issued in 2013, a system which, in its legislative design, lacks precision as regards the persons required to ensure that full compensation is granted as an inherent prerogative of the taxable person or accused of the crime. It is also apparent that the reform of the legal system in question, which took place in 2017, presents two serious problems: symbolic guardianship of civil society’s involvement in actions to complete full reparation; and the blurring of the profile of the Executive Commissioner of the National Victim Care System. The latter legitimises the presence of persons who do not have academic or professional bases in order to ensure full reparation for those who suffered the effects of the punishable conduct, which is not in line with the guidelines of a democratic state governed by the rule of law. In this context, the essential elements of traditional public policies as opposed to public policies with a human rights approach are analysed. The aim is to determine whether the current legislative design of the State obligation to ensure full reparation for victims of crime is in line with the protectionist paradigm driven by the positioning of human rights in the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States. Introduction: This document envisages the dogmatic revision of victim law and its historical development in Mexico, through the constitutional reforms created since 1993. It also provides for the study of the essential elements of comprehensive reparation and its link with the fundamental right to human dignity, enshrined at federal and international level. The aim is to establish the analytical basis on the institutionalisation of re-victimisation in Mexico, owing to the ambiguity in the design of the General Law on Victims regarding the timely establishment of the authority entitled to ensure that full reparation is guaranteed, which distorts the Mexican State’s clear obligation to generate public policies that protect human dignity. Method: From the perspective of systematic legal and comparative methods, consideration is given to the specific features of victim law as a binding point with the essential elements of comprehensive reparation, and the concept of re-victimisation promoted by the Comprehensive Victim Care Model. This is in order to create a common thread explaining institutionalised re-victimisation, resulting from the regulatory ambiguity in the identification of the subjects required to monitor compliance with the comprehensive repair by the Ministry of the General Law on Victims in its latest reform of 2017. The situation described above is not in line with the postulates of a public policy with a human rights perspective, inherent in the protectionist spirit rooted in constitutional reforms in criminal and human rights matters. Results: The normative design of the General Law on Victims, promoted by the Mexican State, enshrines institutional re-victimisation caused by ambiguity in the precise identification of the authorities responsible for monitoring compliance with comprehensive compensation. This situation undermines the fundamental right to human dignity laid down in Article 1 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States; Article 11 (1) of the American Convention on Human Rights; Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and Article 10.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, substantive elements of international human rights law. Discussion/Conclusion: In order to guarantee effective protection of the fundamental right to human dignity, the Mexican State must specify, in paragraph 1 of the General Law on Victims, the authorities empowered to verify compliance with the right to full reparation; that is to say, the clarification of the persons liable for the breach of the legal duty imposed on them by the legislation in question. The Political Constitution of the United Mexican States and international treaties as an irreducible standard of public policies with a human rights approach.