28
*
*
*
92.
After describing the general context prevailing at the time the events in this case, it
is relevant to refer to the creation and activities of the “Los Masetos” paramilitaries, the
group which carried out the Rochela Massacre, and its relationship to members of the
State’s security forces.
93.
It has been proven that the involvement of State agents in the creation and support
of the paramilitary group, which carried out the Rochela Massacre was enabled by the
abovementioned legal framework (supra para. 82 to 85), particularly, by the application of
the abovementioned counter-guerrilla regulations (supra para. 88 and 89).
94.
First, State agents were involved in the emergence and formation of the “Los
Masetos” paramilitary group. In this regard, the Council of State of Colombia maintained
that:
The involvement of army members […] who promoted the formation of the group known as LOS
MASETOS and who supported and covered their activities appears to have been proven in the
events of the instant case; and it has further been proven that the members of such group were
the perpetrators of the massacre […]. Thus, all these facts show the active involvement of
members of the national army in the formation of the group of criminals who killed the members
of the commission, to the extent that, as was stated by one of the preliminary criminal
investigative judges conducting the investigation, it was not even possible to request the
protection of the National Army, as its members were involved in these events.66 (emphasis
supplied)
95.
Furthermore, the State acknowledged that “Los Masetos” operated from the base
located in Campo Capote, with the cooperation of Army units under the command of
Lieutenant Luis Enrique Andrade Ortiz and the support of Staff Sergeant Otoniel Hernández.
In this regard, the Superior Tribunal of Public Order [Tribunal Superior de Orden Público]67
established that the abovementioned lieutenant “had allowed and acquiesced to the free
operation of this armed group in the area,” and that “he was aware of the activities
undertaken by this group, and that and he showed his approval”. Additionally, the
abovementioned court affirmed that Lieutenant Andrade “patrol[led] the area and held all
types of meetings with people who were obviously wearing uniforms and bearing arms
illegally, and who formed what witnesses compared to a real army.”
96.
The support that State agents provided to the paramilitary group which carried out
the massacre, and the relationship existing between them, complied with the
abovementioned counter-guerrilla regulations. Lieutenant Luis Enrique Andrade declared in
the ordinary criminal proceedings brought against him, that he “used Julián Jaimes [,
commander of the “Los Masetos” paramilitary group] as an informant for the Military base,
and for this reason, he provided Mr. Jaimes with a uniform and arms required to act as a
guide to locate the guerrillas.”68 For his part, Lieutenant Andrade’s defense counsel argued
66
Cf. judgment issued on February 1, 1996 by the Third Division of the Contentious Administrative Courts of
the Council of State (record of evidences to the application, volume II, evidence A82, pages 1110 and 1112).
67
Cf. judgment issued on November 14, 1990 by the Superior Tribunal of Public Order (record of evidences
to the application, volume I, evidence A32, pages 499, 501 and 502).
68
Cf. supra note 67 (page 499).
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents