21 […] The pilots, according to the information supplied by the SKYMASTER and the troops on the surface, had the coordinates of the location. The pilots of the SKYMASTER were American and his understanding is that that plane belonged to OXY […] The SKYMASTER was filming and siting locations for their launch […] 81 82. On June 14, 2001, a specialized prosecutor from the National Human Rights Unit of the Office of the Prosecutor General claimed jurisdiction in the case in view of the fact that new evidence had come to light that suggested the perpetration of a crime against humanity. On June 30, 2001, the 122nd Military Preliminary Criminal Investigation Court, in its capacity as the court of first instance, refused the request of the Office of the Prosecutor and blocked the motion of positive conflict of venue presented by the Prosecutor's Office. 82 83. On October 18, 2001, the Disciplinary Jurisdictional Chamber of the Superior Council of the Judicature declared that the military courts had jurisdiction over the instant case. In light of the foregoing, Alba Janeth García Guevara filed an action for a writ of protection against the decision of the Superior Council of the Judicature. On November 27, 2001, the 30th Criminal Circuit Court granted the writ of protection and vacated the judgment of the Superior Council of the Judicature. On February 12, 2002, the Superior Tribunal of the Judicial District of Bogotá ruled on an appeal and decided to reverse the lower court's ruling and deny protection. On October 31, 2002, the First Review Chamber of the Constitutional Court returned judgment T-932-02 in which it vacated the decision at second instance and upheld the judgment issued on November 27, 2001. In addition, it ordered the Disciplinary Jurisdictional Chamber of the Superior Council of the Judicature to issue a new judgment within 15 days. 83 84. As a result of the foregoing, the proceeding was assigned to the National Human Rights Unit, and on December 19, 2003, it brought an indictment against the defendants charging them as co-principals in the crimes of manslaughter and negligent bodily harm.84 The indictment was appealed and on August 26, 2004, the Office of the 37th Prosecutor Assigned to the Superior Tribunal of Bogotá confirmed it with the modification that “the charges of manslaughter and negligent bodily harm against the accused should classify them as principals.” 85 Thereafter, jurisdiction in the case corresponded to the Single Circuit Court of Saravena, which took it up on October 19, 2004 and set a preparatory hearing for December 16, 2004. The counsel for two of the accused requested that the venue for the proceeding be changed to the city of Bogotá and on February 17, 2005, the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court ordered the venue changed to the Criminal Courts of the Bogotá Circuit. 86 81 Annex 5. Special Military Preliminary Criminal Investigation Unit, June 14, 2001, pp. 183 a 188. Appendix C.4 to the petitioners' brief received at the IACHR on October 28, 2003. 82 Annex 4. Twelfth Criminal Court of the Bogotá Circuit with functions under Law 600 of 2000, Judgment at First Instance, Case 2005-102, César Romero Pradilla et al., September 24, 2009, p. 3. Appendix 2 to the State’s brief of October 5, 2010, received at the IACHR on October 6, 2010. 83 Annex 17. Constitutional Court, First Review Chamber, Judgment T-932/02, October 31, 2002. Appendix C.3 to the petitioners' brief received at the IACHR on October 28, 2003. 84 Annex 18. National Unit for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, indictment of December 19, 2003, case 419. Appendix to the petitioners’ brief of August 15, 2006, received at the IACHR on August 21, 2006. 85 Annex 19. Prosecution Unit Assigned to the Superior Tribunal of Bogotá, decision of August 26, 2004. Appendix to the petitioners’ brief of August 15, 2006, received at the IACHR on August 21, 2006. 86 Annex 20. Supreme Court of Justice, Criminal Cassation Chamber, Opinion of the Court presented by Judge Sigifredo Espinosa Pérez, February 17, 2005. Appendix to the petitioners’ brief of August 15, 2006, received at the IACHR on August 21, 2006.