to private security companies. According to several organizations, this progressive privatization of the personnel poses several problems for their own security and for carrying out their activities, including: the historic ties that some private security companies are said to have with paramilitary groups; the possible participation of persons who demobilized in the protection schemes and the lack of experience by the security companies for performing an activity that originally corresponded to the State.36 The IACHR has recommended that the activities of risk analysis and implementation of the measures should be assigned to personnel who belong to a state security agency separate from the one that performs intelligence and counterintelligence activities. In this vein, the IACHR values the efforts by the State to ensure that the personnel in charge of protection are no longer members of the DAS. The Commission considers that the State should ensure that the personnel who participate in the security schemes inspire trust in the beneficiaries of the protection. One fundamental element for achieving such trust is for the State to ensure that the assignment of personnel for protection include the participation of the beneficiaries.37 50. In its 2013 report on the situation of human rights defenders in Colombia the Commission continued receiving complaints about the groups that call themselves “Águilas Negras”, “Rastrojos,” “Urabeños,” and the “Anti-Restitution Army” that perpetrate several forms of violence against human rights defenders considering that the human rights defenders are working with subversive groups, or are obstacles to the full realization of their own activities.38 In addition, the Commission continued receiving information in the course of its visit on the failure to investigate and punish public officials who could be involved in the violations of the rights of defenders, along with the persistence of some discrediting discourse by state agents that aggravates the situation of risk.39 51. In relation to the investigations into the intelligence activities of the DAS, the Commission said that the Colombian judicial authorities determined: [T]he actions or activities carried out by ... G3 ... constituted a real criminal enterprise established to orchestrate the commission of unspecified crimes, which later resulted in the illegal interception of communications, the ongoing use of transmitting and receiving equipment, and the arbitrary and unjust abuse of authority for the end purpose of obtaining, processing, and analyzing private information obtained from NGOs, the attorneys of human rights defenders, lawyers’ associations, journalists, and ultimately anyone with leanings or ideologies that clashed with or opposed those of the government in power (the Álvaro Uribe Vélez administration), through activities such as the tapping of land and mobile phones, the interception of electronic mail, and surveillance and monitoring without an order issued by the pertinent authorities.40 52. The IACHR has also found that for several years Colombia has refused to give human rights defenders access to their personal information that could be found in the intelligence files of the Administrative Security Department (DAS).41 The Commission noted that the State has not adopted a law that makes possible the effective exercise of the right to habeas data, such that persons subject to arbitrary intelligence activities can IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, December 30, 2011, par. 127. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/docs/annual/2011/TOC.asp, Ch. IV Colombia. 37 IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, December 30, 2011, par. 128. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/docs/annual/2011/TOC.asp, Ch. IV Colombia. 38 IACHR, Report on Colombia, December 31, 2013, par. 1134. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Colombia-TruthJustice-Reparation.pdf 39 IACHR, Report on Colombia, December 31, 2013, par. 1136. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Colombia-TruthJustice-Reparation.pdf 40 IACHR, Report on Colombia, December 31, 2013, par. 959. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Colombia-TruthJustice-Reparation.pdf 41 IACHR, Report on Colombia, December 31, 2013, par. 1188. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Colombia-TruthJustice-Reparation.pdf 36 10