15. In addition, the name of a possible murderer was given. Mrs. Mirtala Gómez Amaya, the sister-in-law of the alleged victim, was said to have committed the murder, partly as a result of personal altercations related to the assets of Mr. Jacobo Kawas, the brother of the alleged victim. 16. They further maintained that the same State agents admitted that they were frightened to proceed with the investigation in the case, as a result of the magnitude of the interests involved in it. 17. The eye witness to the crime, Mr. Marcial Bueno, has also refrained from giving a statement out of fear for his life, since he believes that the perpetrators of the murder are persons from the same area, and that they are highly dangerous. 18. The petitioners additionally contend that Sergeant Perdomo of the Public Security Forces coerced Juan Francisco López Mejía to say that he had committed the crime. That same Sergeant was seen visiting the home of Mr. Jorge Montoya, the person who allegedly planned the murder. 19. Thus the petitioners contend that there are various theories regarding the murder of the alleged victim, and that none of them was investigated in full, and moreover that “since 1996 the case has been inactive, without any steps taken to clarify the facts, or identify and punish the persons responsible for planning and executing the crime, and finally that the only legal action taken after 1996 was the appearance of a new prosecutor on June 8, 2001.” 1 The petitioners maintain that the investigation into the murder of Blanca Jeannette Kawas Fernández “has not been serious or effective in bringing justice to this renowned environmentalist.” 2 Despite the existence of witnesses, declarations, DIC reports etc., that set forth different hypotheses regarding the murder of the victim, to date “no responsible party has been identified, and none of the lines of investigation into the different theories has been completed.” 3 20. The petitioners also allege that the case is part of a policy of extrajudicial executions and harassment against environmental defenders. They claim that this is a situation that the State either endorses or tolerates. 21. In the same sense, the petitioners argue that the threats received by the presumed victim, and his later assassination, are a reflection of the critical situation in which environmentalists in Honduras live. The execution of other leaders of this movement, such as Héctor Rodríguez Pastor Fasquel, Carlos Roberto Flores, Carlos Luna and Carlos Escaleras Mejía, reflect this pattern so much so that Amnesty International, the United Nations, and the Department of State of the United States of America have included it in several reports. That the judicial delay is part of the attitude of the State towards defenders of the environment, in this case in particular, has gone beyond any conception of a reasonable period of time. 22. Finally, the petitioners state that the steps indicated by the State do not resolve the considerable defects in the investigation, and that they were only taken after a long period of time had elapsed following the murder. B. The State 23. The Honduran State rejects the claim that there is a systematic policy of persecution and extrajudicial executions against defenders of the environment, and claims that the State has been promoting and defending human rights ever since a considerable improvement in this area in the 1990’s. 1 2 3 Petition lodged by the petitioners on January 13, 2003. Idem. Idem. 3