includes the implementation of various types of threats and harassment designed to prevent the determination of the truth and the identification of those responsible.”28 31. As a result of the gravity of this situation, on April 10, 2006, the Venezuelan State created a National Commission for Police Reform (hereinafter “CONAREPOL”), in order to design a new model for the police. CONAREPOL made a comprehensive evaluation of the situation of the security forces, their characteristics and functions. Its most important findings were that: (a) the police forces retained a deep-seated military component, which translated into a use of aggressive policing tactics that entailed greater probabilities of abuse; greater readiness to use physical force, and aggressive operating strategies that were ineffective to combat crime; (b) there were a large number of command units or groups (also known as “paramilitaries”) who had broad autonomy and considerable fire-power, and who used commando tactics; (c) control mechanisms were frequently left to the superior officer, and not to explicit, formal procedures of oversight and accountability, so that they were ambiguous and arbitrary and, therefore, ineffective as measures of dissuasion, and (d) the disciplinary regime that existed in the police forces was characterized by the dispersion, heterogeneity, discretionality and arbitrariness of actions, contradiction with basic legal principles such as those of legality, due process, effective protection and proportionality, and use of unconstitutional sanctions.29 32. Furthermore, since 2001, the Ombudsman has reported the “permanent existence of unlawful police practices” in the form of extrajudicial executions. Also, in his 2002 report, the Ombudsman warned that extrajudicial executions had “become violence of an endemic nature,” perpetrated by state agents who try and justify their actions by the excuse that it was impossible to obtain justice using the ordinary channels.30 Meanwhile, expert witness Lisandro Raúl Cubas stated that, in Venezuela, the extrajudicial executions were related to a ”cultural problem of the violence used by the police forces, their lack of professional training is evident, and also the issue of impunity […] and the lack of control over police officers.”31 33. Additionally, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Human Rights Committee have repeatedly expressed their concern owing to the proliferation of reports of cases of extrajudicial executions in Venezuela.32 In this regard, in its concluding observations on Venezuela of April 26, 2001, the Cf. Case of Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237, para. 38. 28 Regarding accountability mechanisms for police actions, it indicated that “only about 16% of the security forces require reports of officers involved in in the death or injury of civilians, and less than 20% open investigations in such cases.” National Commission for Police Reform, Evaluation […], p. 60. Among other matters, the CONAREPOL report concluded that “in a context in which the oversight mechanisms are clearly insufficient, and in which police officers lack clear and standardized action protocols, resorting to the use of force – far from being an exceptional action – has gradually become a means of exerting their authority.” Cf. Case of Uzcátegui et al. v. Venezuela, para. 36. Also, National Commission for Police Reform, Evaluation (evidence file, folio 184(b) to 220). 29 Cf. Venezuelan Ombudsman, 2002 annual report (evidence file, folio 184(b) to 334). In addition, in his 2007 annual report, the Prosecutor General stated that, between 2000 and February 2007, the Public Prosecution Service had recorded 6,405 cases in the country of the so-called “executions or confrontations” between civilians and law enforcement personnel. At that time, the Prosecutor General identified 6,885 state officials involved in such acts; it was calculated that only about one-third of those cases (2,132) had really been investigated. This document is in the file of the case of the Landaeta Mejías Brothers et al. v. Venezuela (evidence file, folio 6512). 30 He added that the existence of unlawful police practices as a method of control involving excessive use of force was a reflection of the abuse by police officers. Cf. Public hearing in this case of January 31, 2019. 31 These concerns were included in various reports starting in 1994 and repeated in 1999, 2001, 2003 and 2004, the period covered by the factual framework of the facts of this case. In addition, in several of his reports, the Special Rapporteur called attention to reports of extrajudicial executions by members of the security forces in Venezuela and on the threats received by family members to prevent them from reporting the facts. Cf. United Nations, Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. Reports to the Commission on Human Rights: E/CN.4/1994/7 of December 7, 1993 (para. 638); E/CN.4/1998/68/Add.1 of December 19, 1997 (para. 420); E/CN.4/1999/39/Add.1 of January 6, 1999 (para. 258); E/CN.4/2001/9/Add.1 of January 17, 2001 (para. 420); 32 -11-