18 look into accounts that “military personnel in the area are engaged in collecting money to allow the 72 smuggling of undocumented persons.” 78. On June 26, 2000, the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces submitted to the President of the Republic, for his review and decision, a report on the events of June 18, 2000, in which he stated: […] results of the investigation conducted by a Joint Board of General Officers of the Armed Forces into the roll over accident of the yellow Daihatsu truck, (no license plates), […] as a patrol comprised of members of the Border Intelligence Operations Detachment (DOIF) was trying to stop the vehicle, and fired several shots at the vehicle, resulting in the death of (7) persons, (6) of them Haitian nationals and the other one a Dominican national. The Joint Board of General Officers that conducted the investigation recommended that [the military personnel involved] be tried by Court Martial […] for alleged violations of Articles 295, 304 and 309 of the Criminal Code and in concert with the provisions of Article 3 of the Armed Forces Code of Justice; a recommendation fully supported by this Office. […] The civilians involved in this case shall be placed under the jurisdiction of the Public Prosecutor 73 of the Judicial District of Montecristi for further legal action. 79. On June 27, 2000, the Public Prosecutor of Montecristi submitted a report to the Attorney General of the Republic in which he stated: […] on 6/18/2000, a patrol of members of the Border Intelligence Operations Detachment, killed six Haitian nationals and one Dominican national […] when the pursuit was initiated from the El Posito area, there was a rigorous vehicle checking operation in progress by elements of the Army in order to prevent the entry of Haitian nationals into Dominican territory. […] through the Regional Forensic Institute we released the bodies and the autopsy results. […] that […] the medical examiner […] certified the manner of death of [those] persons […] that on June 26, 2000 […] the Office of the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces brought to justice Mr. FELIX ANTONIO NÚÑEZ PEÑA […] driver of the vehicle […] and Mr. RUDY JIMÉNEZ ORTIZ […] the individual organizing the trip. […] Together with these elements we are submitting a tape recording of the interview of the minor who was traveling with the deceased Dominican MÁSIMO RUBÉN ESPINAL and the driver. In closing, Mr. Attorney General, after a thorough investigation of the facts, we conclude that the investigation reveals: […] that the incident in which the Haitian nationals and the Dominican national lost their lives was the result of an unnecessary action on the part of the members of the Army, since, as several of the persons involved have stated, some of these Haitian nationals were assassinated after the truck had overturned, and it would have been sufficient to shoot the tires and 74 not the passengers and therefore, this action, by all accounts, was totally unnecessary. 80. On July 13, 2000, when the Prosecutor of the Joint Armed Forces and National Police Court Martial of First Instance became aware that the facts could be classified as “criminal,” he requested 75 through decision 15-(2000), that the appropriate preliminary criminal proceedings be initiated. On the same date, the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces informed the Prosecutor of the Joint Armed Forces and National Police Court of the First Instance that he had granted approval to have the military personnel involved tried by the Joint Court Martial “as alleged authors of the crime of murder [against Annex. Annex. 72 Report of the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces of June 26, 2000, State document dated September 20, 2010. 73 Report of the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces of June 26, 2000, State document dated September 20, 2010. 74 Note submitted on July 19, 2000, by the Attorney General of the Republic to the Secretary of State of the Armed Forces, State document dated September 20, 2010. Annex. 75 Preliminary proceedings of the Joint Armed Forces and National Police Court Martial of First Instance, Proceedings No. 15-(2000), July 24, 2000, pg. 2. Petitioners’ document dated May 5, 2009, Annex 1.