6 Yimmy Rodríguez Quintero had provided information against members of the National Police who according to him “had insinuated that he was involved with certain paramilitary groups and [they had threatened him].” The representatives expressed that these facts were worrying, especially because the present provisional measures were granted in order to “denounce the [alleged] ties that members of the National Police in Ocaña may have with criminal outfits.” Additionally, the representatives indicated that the State has not provided any information on the investigations into the acts committed against the Rodríguez Quintero family as provided for in the procedure for provisional measures, and the representatives insisted that “the State’s quick response in investigating, trying, and punishing the responsible parties would have a substantial impact on the situation to which the Rodríguez Quintero brothers and their families continue to be exposed.” In particular, the representatives provided information related to alleged further intimidation and threats: a. On a approximately July 5, 2009, the beneficiary Yimmy Rodríguez Quintero received a pamphlet, allegedly from a guerrilla group, that attempted to link him to paramilitary groups and marked him as a “military objective.” They highlighted that this alleged threat was found by the beneficiary himself underneath the front door to his house one morning, despite the presence of police officers that were supposed to be watching that very location. b. On November 6, 2009, two “agents from SIJIN (Subdivisions of the Judicial Police) of Ocaña,” showed up in plain clothes at Yimmy Rodríguez Quintero’s residence asking to see his brother, William. The experience caused Yimmy “to feel intimidated by the words and general attitudes of these two agents.” c. On May 14, 2010, two members of the National Police of Ocaña “arbitrarily” captured William Rodríguez Quintero. The representatives indicated that these officers did not present an arrest warrant but nonetheless proceeded to take William’s photograph and fingerprint profile. In the face of these facts, the representatives expressed deep concern, given that in the days preceding the death of Jhon Carlos Rodríguez Quintero, a National Police patrol had taken his photo as well.7 The representatives insisted that irregularities had in fact occurred during William’s detention, and Yimmy Rodríguez Quintero filed a compliant with the Solicitor General’s office in Ocaña to that effect. The representatives further requested that the State be required to produce information as to the status of any disciplinary action in the matter, considering that the beneficiary did not receive any such information when filing the complaint. d. On June 15, 2010, the beneficiary Yimmy Rodríguez Quintero informed the representatives that the State “ha[d] not renewed his permit to carry a firearm.” They declared that the beneficiary expressed his concern that by virtue of not having his paperwork in order, the National Police might capture him and charge him with illegally carrying a firearm. 16. Regarding the facts underlying the representatives’ legal complaint, the State indicated that the aforementioned events of May 14, 2010, “were not an attempt on the life of Mr. [William] Rodríguez, nor a situation amounting to a threat that could affect the security of [the Rodríguez Quintero brothers],” but rather in actuality it constituted the fulfillment of an arrest warrant issued by the Third Municipal Criminal Court of Ocaña for the alleged offense of theft. The State explained that on that date officials from the Criminal Investigation Unit of 7 Cf. Case of the 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment and Provisional Measures regarding Colombia, supra note 3, Considering clause eighty-seven.