5. The petitioners allege that on February 6, 1995, Blanca Jeannette Kawas, 47 years of age and President of the Foundation for the Protection of the Natural Resources of the Regions of Lancetilla, Punta Sal, and Texiguan (PROLANSATE), was at home in the company of her personal assistant, Mr. Marcial Bueno, when she was murdered by gunshot. 6. They further allege that Mr. Marcial Bueno was a witness to the event, and he stated that the alleged victim fell to the floor as a result of a shot that went through her left cheek. The judicial inspection report described in the record of removal of the body that a 9 mm caliber firearm had been used, and that the alleged victim died instantly from a shot to the back of the neck with a exit wound in the left cheek. 7. On the day following these events, the petitioners indicate that an investigation was opened, and various statements were obtained providing information on the alleged perpetrators, a description of the vehicle used by them, and the presumed motives. They also report that the Criminal Court [Juzgado de Paz de lo Criminal] of Tela, Department of Atlántida, in charge of the investigation also received information from persons who had disputes with the alleged victim as a result of her environmental work, and who gave information on the alleged parties responsible for both the planning and execution of the crime. 8. They further contend that from these initial statements, it is evident that the alleged victim received a series of threats as a result of the work she performed. Moreover, according to a report from the office of the First Regional Command of the Public Security Forces (CORE), they had information on persons suspected of the crime, but no investigation was conducted on the basis of that information. 9. They also argue that confidential testimony was offered to Edmundo Orellana, the Public Prosecutor [Fiscal General] at the time, involving information on the alleged perpetrators of the murder, and that none of those persons was investigated or summoned to give a statement, and that no efforts were made to inquire further into the information provided. 10. The petitioners also contend that on March 6, 1995, Juan Francisco López gave a statement, containing his version regarding the alleged perpetrators, which included a woman by the name of Reina Mc-Voy, who allegedly asked him to contact a hit man or murderer. He also provided the names of the alleged principals who committed the crime. Mr. López gave the same statement to a CORE Commander. 11. They report that, as a result of this, the judge in charge of the case decided that same day to issue a warrant for the arrest of the persons named in the statement. 12. The petitioners argue that two days after issuing the arrest warrants, the same judge rescinded the warrants in a resolution, without offering any grounds or cause. Moreover, the prosecutor in charge of the case did not appeal the decision by the judge or request an explanation of the reasons for it. 13. The petitioners further contend that in September 1995, Rogelio A. Pacheco Barahona, Chief of Operations of the Criminal Investigation Department (DIC), sent a memo to the assistant director of that department explaining the reasons why he believed that the party allegedly responsible for planning the crime was a person by the name of Jorge Montoya. This neither triggered an investigation, nor resulted in a summons of the alleged author to testify. 14. In addition, they allege that one year later, on May 10, 1996, that same organization (DIC) submitted a report in which the same above-mentioned person was linked to the murder of the alleged victim, and that the reason was the sale of land by Mr. Montoya to the Maloff brothers, who requested that he return the money from the sale, because they were unable to log the land due to cancellation of the logging permit, as a result of steps taken by Jeannette Kawas involving the national office in charge of those matters. 2