37. The Commission has also recorded complaints indicating that the State's public security forces sometimes undertake intelligence activities in a manner calculated to harass or intimidate the human rights workers subjected to intelligence-gathering operations.13 In this regard, the IACHR noted: For example, agents of the public security forces sometimes request detailed personal information regarding individuals which, if revealed, might place these persons in danger. The Commission has received complaints indicating that agents of the State's security forces sometimes make requests for this information through repeated personal visits or telephone calls. When those requesting the information are asked to identify themselves or to make their requests in writing, they sometimes fail to do so. The State's public security forces sometimes also conduct surveillance operations in which human rights workers constantly observe unknown individuals, sometimes armed, following them during their daily activities (…) The intelligence-gathering techniques of the State's security forces thus often cause extreme consternation in human rights workers in the context of the violence in Colombia. Certain intelligence-gathering techniques may even lead to violations of the right to mental integrity, protected in Article 5 of the Convention.14 38. In relation to the consequences of the violence and intimidation for human rights defenders, the Commission said: The attacks are often intended to eliminate directly human rights workers who are seen by the armed actors as enemies in the internal armed conflict. They also often seek to silence the opinions of human rights defenders, including the criticisms and complaints which these persons may level against the State's security forces, the government or others. In order to achieve this objective, the attacks often aim to cause the complete disintegration of human rights organizations. (…) Those who are internally displaced suffer a violation of their right to freedom of movement and residence, guaranteed in Article 22 of the Convention. (…) When human rights organizations are forced to close their offices, the attacks interfere with the rights of members of human rights organizations to assembly and to freedom of association. (…) When individual members are forced to abandon their activities, they also suffer violations of their right to freedom of association.15 39. The Commission also mentioned that “some high level officials of the State have shown through their public statements a lack of commitment to the work of human rights organizations and the protection of human rights workers.”16 The IACHR elaborated: The statements sometimes suggest that non-governmental human rights organizations collaborate with armed dissident groups or plan campaigns against the State's security forces. In the context of the political violence in Colombia, some members of the State's IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Colom99en/table%20of%20contents.htm 14 IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Colom99en/table%20of%20contents.htm 15 IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Colom99en/table%20of%20contents.htm 16 IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Colom99en/table%20of%20contents.htm 13 7 in Colombia, February 26, 1999. Available at in Colombia, February 26, 1999. Available at in Colombia, February 26, 1999. Available at in Colombia, February 26, 1999. Available at