Inter-american court of human rights

454 Cf. Statement made by Emedelia Palacios Palacios before the 21st Special Prosecutor, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit on February 10, 2007 (evidence file, folio 8927); Statement made by H.J.G.B. before the Medellin Departmental Prosecutor, on February 24, 1998, file 426, volume 1, p. 192 (evidence file, folio 38984); Statement made by M.S. before the Medellin Departmental Prosecutor, on February 23, 1998, file 426, volume 1, pp. 187 to 190 (evidence file, folio 38980); Affidavits prepared by Henry Angulo Martinezy and Etilbia del Carmen Paez, on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 15070 to 15073 and 15042); Interview with C.M.P.M. by the Apartadó Judicial Police on April 15, 2010 (helpful evidence: Law 975(1), p. 115) (evidence file, folio 44561).

455 Cf. Statements made before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, by J.E.V.R. on November 5, 2008, Luis Aristarco Hinestrosa on April 13, 2007 and Margarita Vergara on November 11, 2002 (evidence file, folios 16998, 17341 and 642); and Affidavits prepared by Alicia Mosquera Hurtado and Lucelis Bautista Pérez on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 14972 and 15003).

456 Cf. Affidavit prepared by Jerónimo Perez Argumedo on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 14923).

457 Cf. Affidavits of January 21, 2013 prepared by John Jairo Mena, Eleodro Sánchez Mosquera and Ángel Nelis Palacios (evidence file, folios 14982, 15011 and 14994).

458 Cf. Statements made before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, by Luis Airstarco Hinestrosa on April 13, 2007, J.E.V.R. on November 5, 2008, and M.B.S. on December 11, 2002 (evidence file, folio 17341, 16998 and 641).

459 Cf. Statements made before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, by M.A.C.M. and C.M.R. on December 11, 2002 (evidence file, folios 632 and 612) and Affidavit prepared by Marcos Fidel Velásquez on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folio 14950).

460 Cf. Voluntary confessions made by William Soto Salcedo and Alberto García Sevilla, in Collective voluntary confessions of the candidates of the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc concerning Operation Genesis – Cacarica before the 48th Delegate Prosecutor, Justice and Peace Unit, Medellín, April 29, 2010 (evidence file, folios 19177 and 19187).

461 Cf. Statements made by William Soto Salcedo and Fredy Rendón, Collective voluntary confessions of the candidates of the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc concerning Operation Genesis – Cacarica before the Justice and Peace Unit, 48th Delegate Prosecutor, Medellín, April 29, 2010 (evidence file, folio 19177 and 19192).

462 Distance calculated by the Court based on the coordinates provided by the State and not contested by the representatives.

463 Distance calculated by the Court based on the coordinates provided by the State and not contested by the representatives. The State indicated, in particular, that there were several places in the region that were known as La Loma. One of them corresponded to military objective No. 2 near the Salaquí River, more than 30 milometers to the south of Puente América, and two others were places that were, respectively, 1.8 and 2.2 kilometers to the north of the Puente América objective.

464 Cf. Affidavits prepared by Jhon Jairo Mena and Eleodro Sanchez Mosquera on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 14983 and 15011).

465 Cf. Testimony of M.A.C.M. before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, on December 11, 2002 (evidence file, folio 632).

466 Cf. Affidavits prepared by Marco Fidel Velásquez and Ernestina Valencia Teheran on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 14949 and 15021).

467 Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, document and Powerpoint presentation “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folios 19258 and 19263); 14th Special Prosecutor, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, Indictment in case file 2332: “[…] since it is therefore appropriate to conclude that there was a common project between the self-defense forces and the Army, on the one hand the ACCU, and its desire for political and territorial domination and, on the other, the Army and its desire to conquer the FARC subversive group […]. In this region of Chocó department, especially in the area between the municipalities of Riosucio, Carmen de Darién and Murindó (Antioquia), where […] at the time of the event, […] the Elmer Cárdenas paramilitary front of the Self-Defense Forces were present, together with the 57^th and 34^th Fronts of the Revolutionary Forces of Colombia, the combined group that we will hereinafter call “Collusion between Self-Defense and Paramilitary Forces” and members of the Army’s 15^th and 17^th Brigades, who maintained, either individually or in alliances, continuous confrontations with the known results […]” (evidence file, folios 8862 and 8863); “[…]Conclusion II: The death of Marino Lopez Mena was not isolated; it formed part of a strategy of paramilitary consolidation, occupation of territory, and subjection of a common enemy (emphasized in the original) […] inflicting terror in order to achieve the displacement of a non-combattant civilian population, possession of territories and, thus, achieving a point of the conflict that was positive for Castaño’s objective and profitable for del Río’s interest […]” (evidence file, folio 8873); […] Conclusion III: One of the strategies included in the agreement between the Self-Defense Forces and the Army was simultaneous attacks: on the one hand Operation Genesis by the Army, and on the other hand, the AC Elmer Cárdenas Group (perpetrators of the murder). The effect was felt throughout the territory to be taken over; we observe that the sound of the explosive devices launched during this action, naturally, had disastrous effects in Salaquí, but was also felt in a place called Bijao, so that it can be concluded that the effect was felt by all those located in these river valleys. Equally disastrous and generalized was the effect of the death of Marino, because it resulted in displacements throughout the territory; consequently, it merges into a single context, in other words, Operation Genesis and the action of the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc giving rise a third group called “Collusion between Self-Defense and Paramilitary Forces,” which carried out the joint task that, in addition, generated an immense terror, and caused the death of some, such as Marino Lopez Mena, and sent others “mad,” and led to the destruction of the context of their life […] (evidence file, folio 8875); “[…] The Operations took place simultaneously and the illegal group remained for at least 10 days, clearly proving the relationship between General Rito Alejo del Río and the paramilitary group to facilitate, through a third combined group, the common objectives mentioned above […]. It has been proved that, in the sector or area of the Cacarica and Salaquí (adjoining), there was a simultaneous and joint operation formed, on the one hand, by the so-called Genesis (military) and, on the other, the death of Marino Lopez (self-defense forces), where aircraft (planes and helicopters) were used with capacity to cross this reduced air space in instants, because the distance is 36.35 kilometers […]. There were no confrontations between the troops and the self-defense forces; to the contrary, they met in a place called “Bocachica” and moved across the area of Operation Genesis together in helicopters of the State […]” (evidence file, folios 8877 and 8878).

468 Bearing in mind that the nearest object would be objective No. 6: Puente América; however, since the State denies that the Armed Forces attacked this objective, objective No. 5: Teguerre would be the nearest as the State has recognized.

469 Cf. Affidavit dated January 31, 2013, prepared by María Paulina Leguizamón Zarate, expert witness proposed by the State (evidence file, folios 15450 and 15451); Testimony of Luis Emilio Cardozo Santamaría, expert witness proposed by the Colombian State, before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights during the public hearing on February 12, 2013.

470 Distance calculated by the Court based on the coordinates provided by the State and not contested by the representatives.

471 Cf. Voluntary confession made by Luis Muentes Mendoza in Report No. 116 of November 9, 2009, presented by the Technical Investigation Corps to the 122nd and 48th Regional Prosecutors delegated to the Justice and Peace judges (evidence file, folio 17165).

472 Cf. Voluntary confessions made by William Soto Salcedo, Alberto García Sevilla and Fredy Rendón in Collective voluntary confessions of the candidates of the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc concerning Operation Genesis – Cacarica before the 48th Delegate Prosecutor, Justice and Peace Unit, Medellín, on April 28 and 29, 2010: “on the way [from Boca Chica to Lomas de Salaquí] we realized that there had been bombing, because between Teguerre and Salaquí there were numerous craters caused by the bombs”; “we were advancing towards Loma de Salaquí, before arriving, we saw some large craters that the planes had left with the bombing” “[..] where there was a house or most of it, where they were holes, where they said that the bombing had taken place, on the way to Teguerre, we also saw some craters […]” (evidence file, folios 19183, 19189 and 19204).

473 On this point, although the State acknowledged that this objective of Operation Genesis (Objective No. 5) had been attacked, it clarified, without this being contested by the representatives, that the said objective, even though its name was very similar to the community located in the Cacarica River basin (Teguerre Medio), referred to a different geographical site about 25 kilometers away. The distances were calculated by the Court based on the coordinates provided by the State and not contested by the representatives.

474 For example, the village of Teguerre Medio is located about 8 kilometers from objective 4A of Operation Genesis (Bocas del Guineo) and around 10 kilometers from objective 4 of Operation Genesis (Caño Seco). The distances were calculated by the Court based on the coordinates provided by the State and not contested by the representatives.

475 Cf. Affidavits prepared by Jhon Jairo Mena, Eleodro Sanchez Mosquera, Marco Fidel Velásquez and Ernestina Valencia Teheran on January 21, 2013 (evidence file, folios 14982, 14983, 15011, 15012, 14949, 14950, 15021 to 150274 ); and Testimony of M.A.C.M. before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, on December 11, 2002 (evidence file, folio 632).

476 Cf. Statements made by William Soto Salcedo and Alberto García Sevilla, Collective voluntary confessions of the candidates of the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc concerning Operation Genesis – Cacarica before the 48th Delegate Prosecutor, Justice and Peace Unit, Medellín, April 29, 2010 (evidence file, folio 19177 to 19179, 19188 and 19189).

477 Cf. Statements made by Colonel C.A.V.R. before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, on May 8, 1998, and before the Prosecutor delegated to the Supreme Court of Justice on September 11 and 13, 2002 in proceeding No. 5767-5 (evidence file, folios 38794 to 38797, 41284, 41335 and 41336).

478 Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, document and Powerpoint presentation “Operation Cacarica” (evidence file, folios 19258 and 19263), The Prosecutor General’s Office, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, Report No. 260 of June 25, 2012 (evidence file, folio 45156), 14th Special Prosecutor, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, Indictment in file 2332 (evidence file, folio 8875).

479 Cf. Judgment in proceedings No. 2009-063, of the Eighth Criminal Court of the Bogota Special Circuit, August 28, 2012, convicting Rito Alejo del Río Rojas (evidence file, folios 44401 and 44402).

480 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office. Decision No. 025 of the Ombudsman on the massive human rights violations and forced displacement in the Bajo Atrato region of Chocó, October 2002 (evidence file, folio 231)

481 Cf. Report by the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights on the Office in Colombia to the fifty-fourth session of the Commission on Human Rights. E/CN.4/1998/16, of 9 March 1998, para. 103 (evidence file, folio 752). See also: United Nations, Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons submitted in accordance with Commission resolution 1999/47, E/CN.4/2000/83/Add.1 (evidence file, folios 712, 713 and 715).

482 Cf. Amnesty International. Colombia Return to hope - forcibly displaced communities of Urabá and Medio Atrato region, June 2000 (evidence file, folio 1157); Secretariado Nacional de Pastoral Social Bogota, “Situación de Guerra and de Violencia en el Departamento del Chocó 1996-2002,” November 2002, pp. 32, 40 and 76 (evidence file, folios 8773, 8777 and 8795).

483 Cf. Statements of: Colonel A.N.R. on December 27, 2001, Colonel E.L.F.C. on August 30, 2002, M.J.P.P. on September 2, 2002, Colonel M.E.P.G. on September 2, 2002, Lieutenant Colonel P.A.A. on September 4, 2002, Lieutenant Colonel F.C.O. on September 4, 2002, Lieutenant Colonel F.C.O. on September 5, 2002, Lieutenant Colonel F.L.C. on September 9, 2002, and Lieutenant Colonel L.R.G.R. on September 9, 2002, C.O. pp 4, 6, 7, 89, 91, 92, 100, 101, 104, 105, 123, 124, 127, 140, 143 and 153 (evidence file, folios 41131. 41133, 41134, 41216, 41218, 41219, 41227, 41228, 41231, 41232, 41250, 41251, 41254, 41267, 41270 and 41275).

484 Cf. Voluntary confessions of Fredy Rendón Herrera on October 24, 2007, Diego Luis Hinestroza Moreno on April 29, 2010, Alberto García Sevilla on April 29, 2010, and Franklin Hernandez Seguro on August 6, 2008, in Statements of candidates of the extinct AC Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, regarding the so-called “Operation Cacarica (Genesis) made before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit (evidence file, folios 18373, 18210, 19187 to 19189 and 19243).

485 Cf. Interventions of Elda Neyis Mosquera Garcia (alias “Karina”), Danis Daniel Sierra Martínez (alias “Samir”), Nicolas Montoya Atehortua (alias “Elkin”), Marcos Fidel Giraldo Torres (alias “Isaías” or “Garganta”) on January 29 and February 5, 2013, in Report No. 015 of February 6, 2012, of the Technical Investigation Corps addressed to the 44^th Prosecutor delegated to the National Unity Court for Justice and Peace (evidence file, folios 16460 and ff.).

486 Cf. Statements made before the Prosecutor General’s Office, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, by J.E.V.R. on November 5, 2007, Luis Aristarco Hinestrosa on April 13, 2007, J.A.Q. on March 3, 2007, J.B.V.P. on December 19, 2002, and Margarita Vergara Serrana on December 11 (evidence file, folios 16997, 16998, 17341, 17229, 620, 641 and 642).

487 Cf. Statements made by Colonels Germán Castro and Luis Emilio Cardozo Santamaría, witness and expert witness, respectively, proposed by the State, before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights during the public hearing on February 11 and 12, 2013, and Affidavit dated January 31, 2013, prepared by María Paulina Leguizamón Zarate, expert witness proposed by the State (evidence file, folios 15445 to 15449).

488 Cf. Case of the Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, and reparations. para. 123; Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs paras. 82, 93 and 101(a); Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs paras. 125.57, 125.86 and 132, and Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. Colombia. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, paras. 114 and 124.

489 Cf. Case of the 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109 para. 86(c); Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre Colombia. Merits, paras. 126 and 140; Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs, para. 92.

490 Cf. Colombian Supreme Court of Justice, Criminal Cassation Chamber: Review Judgment No. 30516, March 11, 2009 (evidence file, folios 9851 and 9856); Cassation Judgment No. 24448, September 12, 2007, cited in Regional Director of Prosecution Offices, Memorandum No. 0035 of April 28, 2009, pp. 106 to 118 (evidence file, folio 10024). See also Colombian Constitutional Court, decision 005 of January 26, 2009, and Council of State, Third Section, Action for direct reparation, Judgment No. 68001-23-15-000-1996-01698-01, Counselor Rapporteur: Olga Melida Valle de De La Oz of February 27, 2013, p 13.

491 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office, Fourth Report to the Colombian Congress, Santafé de Bogota, 1997, pp. 59 and 60, cited by the Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations in the Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons submitted in accordance with Commission resolution 1999/47, E/CN.4/2000/83/Add.1, of 11 January 2000. para. 25 (evidence file, folio 1571). It should be noted that the President of this Court, through its Secretariat, requested the Colombian Ombudsman’s Office to transmit the Fourth Report of the Ombudsman’s Office to the Colombian Congress as helpful evidence; however, it was not sent. Nevertheless, the State did not contest the reference made to the said report in the United Nations report, so that the Court considers that the reference to its text relates to its literal meaning. See also, Ombudsman’s Office, Twelfth Report of the Ombudsman to the Colombian Congress, January-December 2004, pp. 66, 67, 172 and 173; Ombudsman’s Office. Ombudsman’s Report on the forced displacement owing to the violence in Colombia, of April 2002, points 4 and 9; and Ombudsman’s Office. Report on monitoring compliance with Judgment T-1025 of 2007, pp. 16, 17, 21, 35 and 35.

492 Public Prosecution Service, Human Rights Office, Ruling issued by the Human Rights Office on September 30, 2002. Ruling cited in the Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. para. 125.100: “on September 30, 2002, the disciplinary office delegated to the defense of human rights decided to sanction Lieutenant Everardo Bolaños Galindo and Sergeant first class Germán Antonio Alzate Cardona, alias “Rambo,” removing them from their positions as public officials because it found them responsible for having intentionally collaborated with and facilitated the paramilitary incursion in El Aro and the removal of livestock. On November 1, 2002, following an appeal filed by these two individuals, this ruling was confirmed in second instance by the Disciplinary Chamber of the Public Prosecution Service.”

493 Cf. Testimony of Miguel Samper, deponent for information purposes proposed by the State, before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, during the public hearing on February 12, 2013: “[…] by a very substantial institutional reform that resulted in the creation of a Historical Memory Center responsible for contributing to and also promoting the construction by civil society of this historical memory on the legacy of gross and evident human rights violations or breaches of international humanitarian law […]”; “[…] the Historical Memory Center is responsible for promoting and obtaining measures of satisfaction […].”

494 Cf. Testimony of Javier Ernesto Ciurlizza Contreras, expert witness proposed by the Commission, before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights during the public hearing on February 12, 2013: “ […] I refer to those reports prepared by the Historical Memory Center or what was previously called the Historical Memory Group of the National Reparation and Conciliation Commission indicating that, indeed, the paramilitary phenomenon was associated with private individuals, at least at the local level […]”.

495 Cf. National Historical Memory Center, “¡Basta ya! Colombia: Memorias de guerra y dignidad. Informe General Grupo de Memoria Histórica,” Imprenta Nacional, Colombia, 2013, pp. 20, 42, 48, 343 and 347; and
“Justicia y Paz ¿verdad judicial o verdad histórica?” Colombia, 2012, pp. 251, 377, 469, 498, 513, 514 and 515; “La Rochela: Memorias de un crimen contra la justicia”, Ed. Semana, Colombia, 2010, pp. 20, 95, 96, 104, 105 and 116; “Silenciar en Democracia. Las masacres de Remedios y Segovia, 1982–1997,” Ed. Semana, Colombia, 2010, pp. 21, 22, 28, 29, 61, and 73 to 76; “La masacre de Bahía Portete: Mujeres Wayuu en la mira”, Ed. Semana, Colombia, 2010, pp. 23 and 33; “San Carlos: Memorias del éxodo en la guerra”, Ed. Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara, S. A., Colombia, 2011, pp. 87 and 15; “Mujeres y guerra. Víctimas y resistentes en el Caribe colombiano”, Ed. Aguilar, Altea, Taurus, Alfaguara, S. A., Colombia, 2011, pp. 31, 32 and 240.

496 Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, Justice and Peace Unit, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, structures described by Fredy Rendón (evidence file, folio 45254).

497 Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, Justice and Peace Unit, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, structures described by Fredy Rendón (evidence file, folios, 45257, 45282 and 45289).

498 Cf. Prosecutor General’s Office, Justice and Peace Unit, Dossier on the Elmer Cárdenas Bloc, structures described by Fredy Rendón (evidence file, folios 45257, 45282, 45289 and 45312). The document indicates, in particular, that the paramilitaries were accompanied by “3 piranha boats and a small Navy vessel” and that the Mayors of Vigía and of Bojaya participated and collaborated at that time, as well as the Police of Vigía and of Bojaya.

499

Download 2.23 Mb.

Share with your friends: