74 286. Indeed, as regards the first complaint, it has been document before the IACHR that part of the ancestral lands of the Community were sold by State authorities to businesses and third parties, without the Community’s authorization. On this, the Commission observes that, through CODETT, the Community filed a criminal complaint with the Office of the Prosecutor for Ethnic Groups regarding the sale of Community land to IDETRISA, which ended with a case against the municipal officials involved being dismissed. It also observes from the facts deemed proven that the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic became aware of those sales, which led to the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic initiating an investigation. The IACHR was not informed of any effective outcome of that investigation. In addition, in a communication dated November 30, 1998, the Community Council denounced such sales to the Attorney General. The IACHR is unaware of any actions taken to effectively investigate the alleged occurrences. 287. Although it transpires from the evidence in the file that State authorities directly participated in this and other sales of indigenous land, the IACHR understands that so far responsibility has not been assigned nor have the corresponding punishments been imposed, where applicable, on the State authorities involved in the gradual dispossession of Garífuna ancestral lands. The IACHR notes that that is the case even though such sales rendered the Community and its members seriously vulnerable and despite the State authorities expressly recognizing that the lands sold in the area of the 22 manzanas formed part of the Community’s ancestral property and were returned to it, as the State itself affirmed. 288. It is also a documented fact that, as a result of the territorial dispute, members of the Triunfo de la Cruz Community complained to State authorities regarding acts of harassment, persecution, threats and even murders of leaders who opposed the theft of Community land. As the IACHR pointed out, the attacks on indigenous leaders seek to curtail activities aimed at defending and protecting natural territories and resources and to weaken the Community’s resolve to defend its rights. Here, the Commission stresses that the most effective way of protecting human rights defenders is to investigate 371 acts of violence against them effectively and to punish those responsible. 289. At the same time, the sales of indigenous land and the lack of protection against occupation of its ancestral territories by non-Garífunas triggered a situation of permanent conflict. As the Community denounced, that situation was characterized by the irruption of armed men into indigenous territory, the destruction of crops, the bringing in of machinery against the Community’s will, the burning down of houses, along with other acts of violence that prevented peaceable possession of the Community’s ancestral territory. 290. In short, during the years under review in the instant case, the IACHR received multiple complaints filed with police and prosecutors which describe a plethora of acts of permanent and related violence, which together mount to a generalized lack of protection of the ancestral territory of the Garífuna Community of Triunfo de la Cruz. Despite the numerous complaints in the file with the IACHR, in no case did the State report that a serious, effective, and prompt investigation was carried out to ascertain the truth and determine responsibilities. In this regard, the IACHR recalls the Inter-American Court’s assertion that: […]Proceedings followed through up until their conclusion and that fulfill their purpose are the clearest sign of zero tolerance for human rights violations, contribute to the reparation of the victims, and show society that justice has been done. The imposing of an appropriate punishment duly founded and proportionate to the seriousness of the facts, by the competent authority, permits verification that the sentence imposed is not arbitrary, thus ensuring that it does not become a type of de facto impunity. In this regard, the Court has emphasized that administrative or criminal 371 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124. Doc. 5 rev.1, March 7, 2006. Likewise, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has indicated that the lack of investigation and punishment of those responsible for violations against human rights defenders “constitutes the factor that places the defenders at greatest risk, since it leaves them defenseless and unprotected.” OHCHR. Defending Human Rights: Caught Between Commitment and Risk. Executive Summary, paragraph 7. http://www.hchr.org.mx/documentos/libros/informepdf.pdf.