10 i. regarding the investigation into the murder of Mr. Malagón and Mr. Giraldo, “[t]he State of Colombia has not submitted to the Court serious arguments which show that it is unable to investigate into these facts and elucidate them. […] It is obvious that the State of Colombia has not undertaken the investigations in a serious manner and as a duty of the State to elucidate the facts.” Since the adoption of provisional measures was ordered in October 1996, the State has repeatedly submitted the same information, pointing out that the investigation was at the preliminary stage and that evidence was being collected. Therefore, they consider that the State must inform about the obstacles it has encountered and indicate the strategy designed to cause said investigations to progress significantly; ii. regarding the investigations into the threats against Ms. Rey, the lack of response concerning the elucidation of the facts which gave rise to the adoption of the provisional measures is to be remarked. Such investigations have led neither to the elucidation of any of the threats or acts of harassment, nor to the identification, trial, and punishment of those responsible for such acts. Furthermore, the State of Colombia has merely pointed out that the investigation proceedings were closed, without describing or explaining the steps that were taken so that such investigations were conducive to the compliance with the duty to prevent threats. The fact that there was no “partie civile” cannot be used as an excuse to for the lack of progress in the investigations. The proceedings should be reopened and an investigative line should be designed which allows identifying the source of the threats and addressing the source of risk to Ms. Rey; and iii. regarding the disciplinary investigation started against escort Luis Adolfo Cárdenas-Barrera, Ms. Rey completely disagrees with the decision to close the proceedings, as it was not taken on the grounds of the events which actually occurred. c) Regarding the steps taken with a view to reopening the Comité Cívico por los Derechos Humanos del Meta (Meta Department Human Rights Civic Committee), that: i. the commitment taken on by the Government to hold a meeting with the local authorities has not been met to date; ii. the State must inform about “the relation between the Action Plan ‘Visión sin Límites’ and the compliance with the protection measure referred to the reopening of the Comité Cívico por los Derechos Humanos del Meta (Meta Department Human Rights Civic Committee) […];” and iii. the State must “start and conclude such actions as may be necessary to seek the reopening of the Comité Cívico por los Derechos Humanos del Meta (Meta Department Human Rights Civic Committee),” a measure which will lead to reestablishing the conditions for the effective guarantee of the defense of human rights, as well as “develop actions so that Islena Rey, the only member of the Comité por los Derechos Humanos del Meta (Meta Department Human Rights Civic Committee) who still lives in Villavicencio, may reassume her activities at the non-government organization.”