the witnesses who affirmed that the perpetrators were dressed in “dark clothes and boots” and highlighted that there were inconsistencies in the statements provided by the surviving witness José Hernández. Moreover, it argued that Jimmy Guerrero was never deprived of liberty or arbitrarily arrested. 13. It alleged that the families of the alleged victims were heard during the internal investigation and that they were guaranteed the access to simple and rapid appeals, alleging that the rights to judicial guarantees and protection had not been violated. It claimed that the investigation carried out at the internal level has been diligent and impartial, and that the right of the alleged victims to the obtention of justice has been guaranteed. It explained that if an irrevocable criminal judgment is not obtained, the mechanisms of civil compensation for damages cannot be activated. 14. It highlighted that the criminal procedural law in Venezuela does not establish a specific period to individualize possible perpetrators after the investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office has been initiated, and that in some cases it is not possible to do so despite the execution of evidence and proceedings. Therefore, the lack of a trial, despite the time that has passed, is not a violation to its international obligations. 15. It questioned the alleged existence of a context of extrajudicial executions in Venezuela with the pattern described by the petitioners. It claimed that in the specific case, concealment actions that favor the impunity of the events or the direct participation of state agents have not been demonstrated. Following the same line, it claimed that stigmatization nor discrimination had been intended, but that from the internal records it follows the existence of open criminal proceedings against Jimmy Guerrero, which allegedly “were sufficient proof to confirm his relations with other persons who break Venezuelan laws.” 16. Regarding the alleged harassment on the part of police officers of the Falcón state, it argued that the prior complaints filed by the alleged victim against police forces were lodged in order to prevent them from carrying out monitoring activities to Jimmy Guerrero, and that it is not “unusual” that his death had been a result of a “settling of scores between gangs, which is frequent when belonging to the criminal world.” In such context, the State justified a search warrant to Jimmy Guerrero’s house and mentioned other measures that the alleged victim could have lodged to request protection. 17. Subsequently, in its communication from June 9, 2016, the State informed that an arrest warrant has been issued against an officer who worked as a superintendent and chief of the Police Zone 2 of the Armed Police Forces of Falcón state, for the events related to the death of the alleged victims. III. FACTUAL ANALYSIS A. Context 18. In the present case, the petitioners alleged that the death of the presumed victims is a result of the context of extrajudicial executions in Venezuela, specifically in Falcón state. By means of its different mechanisms, the Commission has identified a context of extrajudicial executions in the country that started several years ago. Moreover, the Inter-American Court has referred to said context in its analysis of cases that exemplifies it. The determination over the existence of said context and the characterization of the problem in the abovementioned cases was analyzed by the Commission as well as by the Court, considering reports from state authorities3 and international4 and national5 non-governmental organizations. The time frame of said sources encompasses the events alleged in the present case. Annex 1. Public Ministry. Annual Report 2006. Presentation of the General Prosecutor of the Nation, General Prosecutor’s Office. Annex to the initial petition. See also: Ombudsman of Venezuela. Report: Execution and Forced Disppearances. Annual report 2001; Annual Report 2002 of the Ombudsman of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Annual Report 2003 of the Ombudsman of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Annual Report of the Ombudsman, Annual Report 2003; Ombudsman’s report, Annual Report 2006; Speech of the General Prosecutor of the Nation due to the presentation of the Annual Report on Management of the year 2005. April 25, 2006; National Commission for the Police Reform (CONAREPOL). Characteristics of the Venezuelan Police, Annual Report of the General Prosecutor of the Republic of 2007. 4 International Amnesty. Venezuela. HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION. AN UNFINISHED TASK. 5 PROVEA. Annual Reports available at: https://www.derechos.org.ve/; Annex 1. COFAVIC/Parapolice groups in Venezuela, 2005, pages 28-33; Annex 3. Assessment on the Human Rights Situation in the State of Aragua between July 1996 and March 2003, prepared by the 3 3