16 February 2000. He also testified about the orders, instructions, strategies and directives adopted by the Military Forces between 1996 and 2006 relating to the criminalization and fight against the illegal self-defense groups, as well as the alleged operational results of this campaign. f) José Daniel Castro, a witness proposed by the State who is General and Director of the National Police [General y Director de la Policía Nacional]. The witness testified about the alleged advances made in dismantling the illegal self-defense groups during the period 1998 – 2006, and the alleged improvement in the security situation in Colombia, within the framework of the so-called Policy of Defense and Democratic Security [Política de Defensa y Seguridad Democrática]. g) Guillermo Mendoza Diago, a witness proposed by the State who is the Assistant Attorney General of the Nation [Vicefiscal General de la Nación]. The witness testified about the operation and alleged strengthening of the National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit [Unidad Nacional de Derechos Humanos y Derecho Internacional Humanitario] and the National Prosecutors Unit for Justice and Peace [Unidad Nacional de Fiscalías para la Justicia y la Paz]. h) Héctor Cruz Carvajal, a witness proposed by the State who is a Specialized Prosecutor [Fiscal Especializado] for the National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit. The witness testified about the investigations that have developed and continue to be carried out in relation to the Rochela Massacre case. i) Nubia Herrera,22 a witness proposed by the State who at the time of her testimony was the National Vice Procurator General [Viceprocuraduría General de la Nación]. The witness referred to disciplinary investigations that had moved forward with regard to the Rochela Massacre and the intervention of the National Office of the Procurator General [Procuraduría General de la Nación] in the conciliation proceedings before the contentious administrative courts. j) Carlos Franco Echavarría, a witness proposed by the State who is the Director of the Presidential Program on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law. The witness testified about the alleged initiatives put forward by the Presidential Program to grant measures of reparation to the victims and their families in the present case, particularly with regard to educational and work benefits. k) Iván Cepeda Castro, an expert proposed by the representatives who is a philosopher and investigative reporter on matters of human rights and humanitarian law. The expert offered his report on the alleged absence of guarantees of non-repetition in order to achieve the definitive dismantling of paramilitarism as a counter-insurgent strategy in Colombia, the alleged continuity and strengthening of paramilitarism in the conditions of the current process of demobilization and the alleged insufficiencies of the juridical framework in force in order to satisfy the guarantees of nonrepetition and the victims’ rights. 22 The witness whose testimony was requested by the President of the Court in the Order of December 22, 2006 was Carlos Gómez Pavajeau, Assistant Attorney General of the Nation. However, on January 16, 2007, the State relayed to the Court that Mr. Gómez Pavajeau was absent from his position due to vacation. Instead, the State offered in good faith the affidavit of Ms. Nubia Herrera, who substituted for Mr. Gómez during his vacation time (infra para. 61).