9 guarantee of access for these companies to the area's natural resources. They consider that the State has a duty to ensure the protection of ancestral lands and, therefore, of collective property. From all the foregoing, they allege that the State has violated Articles 11.2 and 21 of the American Convention in relation to Article 1.1, to the prejudice of the communities associated with CAVIDA and the women head of household in Turbo. 42. The petitioners consider that the State is responsible for the violation of the autonomous right to equality and non-discrimination, operating as a criterion for the protection of all human rights. They allege that the Cacarica communities have been victims of historical and systematic discrimination by the State by being relegated from the fulfillment of public policies, by lacking effective State protection and by living in precarious subsistence conditions; thus placing them in a vulnerable state, as an easy target for aggression and attack. They allege that there has been discrimination against the Afrodescendant tribal people of Cacarica by reason of the place where they live, which is considered a strategic geographical area. They allege that the State did not prevent the violations, nor did it protect or guarantee the human rights of these Afro-descendants. They allege that the State failed to adopt positive measures to prevent or alter the discriminatory situations against the alleged victims. They allege that the assistance actually provided to them failed to take into account their unique character as tribal and Afrodescendant peoples. From the foregoing, they consider that the State has violated Article 24 of the American Convention in relation to Article 1.1. 43. The petitioners allege that the State is responsible for the violation of the rights to judicial guarantees and protection, given that it failed to ensure the full and free exercise of the rights enshrined in the American Convention, that the human rights violations were not prevented and that, after more than twelve years, the perpetrators have not been tried or punished. They allege that the State has failed to clarify the truth and that the victims have not received reparation. 44. They allege that there have been multiple difficulties in the judicial investigations undertaken and that these have affected the enjoyment judicial guarantees and the rights to judicial protection and truth, and the access to justice and reparations. They allege that the full and active participation of the victims in the judicial process has been hampered, so that impunity for the crimes continues as a multiple violation of human rights. In addition, they allege the existence of an atmosphere of impunity in view of the fact that the investigations are currently archived, precluded or remain at a preliminary stage. 45. They allege that during this time there has been continual negligence in the gathering of technical evidence regarding the destruction of the villages, the identification of the craters of the bombardment, the undertaking of exhumations, and the denial of access to justice, given the difficulties faced by the victims to participate as civil parties in the criminal proceedings. 46. They allege a lack of independence and impartiality of the judicial branch in the criminal investigation through attacks and judicial reprisals, as well as the threats against the lives and jobs of the officials working at the National Human Rights Unit of the Prosecutor General's Office (UDH-FGN) which were conducting investigations against members of the Security Forces such as General Del Río Rojas. They allege that the UDH-FGN officials investigating this General and his subordinate's responsibility in the development of "Operation Genesis" and the commission of crimes against humanity, were subjected to persecution. 47. They allege a lack of independence and impartiality on the part of former Prosecutor General, Luis Camilo Osorio, who ordered the closing of the criminal investigations against the aforementioned General for the crimes committed in "Operation Genesis", and dismissed the evidence and arguments lodged by the victims. 48. Regarding the State's allegation with respect to the victims' lack of collaboration as a justification for the impunity of the crimes, the petitioners reply that the prosecution never undertook to gather the available technical evidence which it might have undertaken given that: the attack causing the forced displacement was forceful, the displaced persons had been living in Turbo for three years, and all