the process, in the sense that the alleged confrontation could have lasted “fifteen minutes” minutes”106; or between “five to ten minutes”. 107 105; “ten 80. Fourth, the Commission observes that according to the available information in the casefile, it was only after the alleged confrontation with Mr. Villamizar that it was alleged that he was a guerilla. In this regard, the Commission notes that according to the internal investigation, said qualification was credited to the statements of Mrs. Neyda Díaz Morales and Merly Días Morales108, and that of Mr. Fredy Rodríguez Centeno109 who asserted that he recognized Mr. Villamizar, a.k.a. Cendales, as a member of the ELN. The Commision notes that said statements were rendered between August 24 and November 8, 1996. Likewise, the alleged annotations of intelligence with regard to the alias Cendales were issued on May 23, 1998. 110 81. In this regard, the Commission does not have additional evidence beyond the testimony of the military personnel and the alleged discovery of the pamphlets indicative of the subversive group FARC-EP allegedly found with the body that would have justified publicly informing the version that Mr. Villamizar was a member of the ELN, as it was informed the next day on the news reports on “Emisora de Radio La Voz del Cinaruco de Arauca.”111 To the contrary, according to various statements of the military men, when they shot at Mr. Gustavo Giraldo Villamizar they had no record of his person. 112 105Annex.33. Diligence rendered by regular soldier Mamérito Pérez Mosquera before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, August 20, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 106Annex. 28 Diligence rendered by regular soldier Regular Nelson Alfredo Monroy de León before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, August 30, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 107Annex. 24. Diligence rendered by SLV. Mr. Reymund Piñeres before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 26, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on October 29, 2010. 108In this regard, Ms. Neyda Díaz Morales stated she declared because of her “desire to collaborate with the authorities.” She stated knowing Mr. Giraldo Villamizar “only of hello, quehubo, no more” and that “[she] saw him every day in Saravena, on a motorcycle […] but the only thing he did was killing people.” She stated “not seeing him, but being told he had killed a young woman” and that “it was commented that he was a guerilla member of the E.L.N.” In response of the question whether she identified “alias Cendales”, she stated that by driving “a bike 125, I believe was white.” Finally stated knowing that person “has or left a pregnant woman but I ignore the name.” Annex. 34. Diligence rendered by Neyda Díaz Morales before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, November 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. Likewise, Mrs. Merly Díaz Morales stated she came to declare “because the guerrilla will say [that Mr. Villamizar] is a peasant.” She stated that Mr. Giraldo Villamizar “was killed because it seems […] he was […] looking if the army was there because they were going to pass armaments, he was on a motorcycle, that is what I was told, because more or less people knew what he was going to do.” She stated knowing Mr. Giraldo Villamizar in the village “about two years ago” and the “people commented he worked in the organization […].” Stated that the kind of relation she had with him was only “hello, quiubo, nothing more […].” She Stated that “[…] he belonged to the ELENOS, because one knows who is whom there […].” Stated “not knowing what position he would have held […] and in the village, he was a cadre of a ELN cell” that “daily stayed in a motorcycle, seeing which girl spoke with a military man to later go and let know or take away her life.” To the question of who were his friends she replied that “the young man they took yesterday everyone called him Dumar, “they were always together”[…].” She stated that “they load guns daily, […].” Annex. 35. Diligence rendered by Merly Díaz Morales before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, November 8, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. 109 1996. Annex. 36. Diligence rendered by Fredy Rodríguez Guerrero before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, August 24, 110 Annex. 37. Fuerzas Militares de Colombia, Ejército Nacional, Grupo Mecanizado No. 18 Rebeiz Pizarro, Informe del Oficial S2 GMREB, 23 de mayo de 1998. 111 Maribel Villamizar Durán stated that “the news was broadcasted by Emisora de Radio La voz Cinaruco de Arauca informing that the army had killed in combat a guerilla man of the ELN, and that they had seized armament.” Anexo 27.Testimony of Maribel Villamizar Durán before Notary Public, October 15, 2010. Likewise, Mr. Gustavo Villamizar Lizarazo stated that “according to the radio news [his son] supposedly died in a combat.” Annex. 8. Complaint rendered by the citizen Gustavo Villamizar Lizarazo before the Office of the Municipal Ombudsperson, August 20, 1996. Annexed to the communication of the petitioners of April 29, 2010. 112 So, the regular soldier Mamérito Pérez Mosquera, to the question whether in the base of the village they had any information with regards to that subject, he stated “no, there was no information.” Annex. 33. Diligence rendered by regular soldier Mamérito Pérez Mosquera on August 20, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010. Sergeant Jiménez stated he had no records of the subject “I did not recognize him because he was traveling at a high speed on his vehicle, afterwards we realized, through the intelligence information, that he had a record.” Annex. 22. Diligence rendered by First Sergeant Mr. José Virgilio Jiménez Mahecha before Court 124 of Military Criminal Instruction, October 24, 1996. Annexed to the written brief of the State received on August 26, 2010.