3 8. On February 8, 2002 the Commission issued precautionary measures in favor of Marco Tulio Bustos Ortiz, Jairo Javier Bustos Acuña and María Esneda Bustos, witnesses in the judicial proceeding for the massacre committed in Mapiripán. 9. On April 12, 2002 the Commission issued precautionary measures in favor of Lieutenant Colonel Hernán Orozco Castro, who was the acting commander of the “Joaquín París” battalion at the time of the alleged massacre. 10. On March 4, 2003, during its 117th regular session and in accordance with Article 50 of the Convention, the Commission adopted substantive Report No. 38/03, in which it found that: […] the Republic of Colombia is responsible for the violation of the rights to life, to humane treatment and to the personal liberty of the victims in the massacre committed in Mapiripán between July 15 and 20, 1997, embodied in Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the American Convention. The State is also responsible for abridgment of the right to due process and of the right to judicial protection of the victims and their next of kin, set forth in Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, as well as for non-fulfillment of its obligation to ensure respect for the rights set forth in said Treaty, pursuant to its Article 1(1). Based on the analysis and conclusions of the Report, the Commission recommended that the State: 1. Conduct a complete, effective, and impartial investigation through ordinary legal proceedings, with the aim of trying and punishing all those responsible for the massacre committed against approximately 49 victims in the municipality of Mapiripán, Department of Meta; 2. Take such steps as may be necessary for those affected to receive adequate reparations for the violations committed by the State; 3. Take such steps as may be necessary to avoid repetition of similar acts, in accordance with the duty of prevention and guarantee of the basic rights embodied in the American Convention, as well as such measures as may be necessary to fully comply with the doctrine developed by the Colombian Constitutional Court and by this Commission regarding investigation and prosecution of similar cases by regular criminal justice; 11. On June 5, 2003 the Commission sent to the State substantive Report No. 38/03 and gave it two months time to report on “the steps taken to comply with the recommendations made.” In a letter that same day, the Commission informed the petitioners that it had adopted the report and sent it to the State, and it inquired about their position regarding the possibility of filing the case before the InterAmerican Court if the State did not carry out the Commission’s recommendations. 12. On July 9, 2003 the petitioners replied to the Commission’s June 5, 2003 letter, and they stated that it was pertinent to file the case before the Inter-American Court. 13. On August 22, 2003, after the Commission had granted two extensions, the State filed its reply regarding the steps taken to carry out the recommendations issued in Report 38/03. 14. On September 5, 2003, after analyzing the State’s response to said recommendations, the Commission decided to bring the instant case before the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court.