[T]he Commission received information on the creation under DAS of a Special Strategic Intelligence Group, known as “G3,” that, inter alia, would conduct intelligence operations on activities linked to litigation of international cases and on international contacts of organizations engaged in the defense of human rights. […] [T]he IACHR received information to the effect that the intelligence activities of “G3” reputedly targeting human rights defenders ... were intended to collect strategic intelligence, identify risks and threats to the government and national security, carry out “offensive intelligence and psychological warfare” measures, and prosecute opponents of the government’s policies. These measures were part of a pattern of intimidation and harassment designed to neutralize or restrict activities of individuals and organizations with opposition leanings.30 46. In its 2010 annual report the Commission received information on killings, acts of harassment, and violence against human rights defenders, both men and women, as well as criminalizing them in order to obstruct their activities as members of organizations dedicated to the defense of human rights.31 The IACHR repeated its particular concern over the use of intelligence measures against human rights defenders.32 47. In its 2011 annual report the Commission observed the continued use of forms of discourse aimed at discrediting human rights defenders; attacks on their lives and integrity, without notable results in the investigations; as well as the filing of criminal actions, allegedly unfounded, with the aim of criminalizing their work.33 In that regard, it said: The IACHR noted that although the State indicated that it had adopted a policy of “disarming the word,” as part of a non-confrontational discourse with human rights defenders, in practice there has not been significant progress in the situations they face, which have persisted for several years. In this regard, it is especially worrisome that public officials continue making declarations aimed at discrediting human rights defenders, which could increase the risks they face as they pursue their activities and undermine the trust of Colombian society in human rights organizations.34 48. During 2011, the IACHR received information related to a series of shortcomings in the processes of requesting and implementing the special measures of protection that the Protection Program for Human Rights Defenders, Trade Unionists, Journalists and Social Leaders provides. In this respect, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia stated in its report on Colombia for 2011 its concern over the persistence of delays in conducting studies of risk, sluggishness in the implementation of measures, the lack of a differential approach, and the assignment of the protection schemes to private companies. In addition, in its recommendations the OHCHR has encouraged the government to undertake an exhaustive review of the policies and programs for protection, of both the government and other entities of the State.35 49. As regards the DAS, the Commission indicated: One aspect of special concern to civil society is that in the process of liquidating the DAS, the security schemes of the Protection Program that were assigned to it were gradually assigned IACHR, 2009 Annual Report, December 30, 2009, par. 132. Available at: http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2009eng/Chap.IV.a.eng.htm IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, March 7, 2011, par. 195. Available at: http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2010eng/TOC.htm, Ch. IV Colombia. 32 IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, March 7, 2011, par. 285. Available at: http://www.cidh.org/annualrep/2010eng/TOC.htm, Ch. IV Colombia. 33 IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, December 30, 2011, par. 117. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/docs/annual/2011/TOC.asp, Ch. IV Colombia. 34 IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, December 30, 2011, par. 118. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/docs/annual/2011/TOC.asp, Ch. IV Colombia. 35 IACHR, 2010 Annual Report, December 30, 2011, par. 125. Available at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/docs/annual/2011/TOC.asp, Ch. IV Colombia. 30 31 9