and the fact that it is impossible for the authorities to have easy and safe access to the areas where they need to go to gather evidence. In this regard, it indicates that the Fiscalía has reported that “both the SIJIN, and the National Army and CTI Office in Villavicencio have concurred on how difficult it is to gain access to the area due to the prevailing situation of law and order there, which has prevented any possible measures to exhume a body.” 1 17. In addition, the State reports that the Procuraduría Disciplinaria para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos initiated a preliminary inquiry in order to determine if there was a breach of discipline related to the events of this case, and if so, to identify and punish the responsible parties. In this regard, it indicates that the Procuraduría Disciplinaria closed the preliminary inquiry due to a lack of evidence to support charges against the commanding and deputy officers attacked by Mr. Tabares Toro. 18. In reference to the investigation that was conducted by the 28th Military Criminal Prosecutor’s Office [Fiscalía], the State reports that “it is not known whether Mr. Tabares Toro was convicted in lower court for the crime of attempted homicide and whether the judgment was appealed,” in which case the appeal could be the appropriate way to terminate proceedings regarding the alleged violation. 2 On this point, the State maintains that in the event that the criminal judgment is final and res judicata, the next of kin of the alleged victim could have recourse to acción de tutela [a special constitutional remedy], since in accordance with Colombian constitutional case law, this is a legal recourse against unlawful judicial decisions. 19. In addition, the State alleges that there are two remedies that have not been exhausted by the petitioner: action for direct reparations brought before a jurisdiction that reviews administrative court decisions; and, acción de tutela. The State contends that these legal actions are adequate remedies that the petitioners should have made use of in this case. As regards the action for direct reparations, the State maintains that such a remedy is available and could be applied by the petitioners despite the time elapsed since the alleged disappearance of Mr. Tabares Toro, in accordance with Article 7 of Law 789/2000, which establishes that “the statute of limitations of action for direct reparations based on the crime of forced disappearance shall be counted from the date on which the victim appears or, failing that, from the date of the final judgment handed down in the criminal proceedings, notwithstanding the fact that such action could be brought at any time after the events giving rise to the disappearance occurred”. 20. On the basis of these elements, the State argues that it rules out application of any of the exceptions contained in Article 46(2) of the American Convention. In this regard, the State requests that the petition presented by the petitioners regarding its responsibility in the acts related to the alleged forced disappearance of Mr. Tabares Toro and the lack of judicial clarification be declared inadmissible. III. A. ANALYSIS ON ADMISSIBILITY Jurisdiction 21. In principle, the petitioners are authorized by Article 44 of the American Convention to lodge petitions with the Commission. The petition states that the 1 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Department of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, Communication No. 8755, February 23, 2005. 2 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Department of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, DDH 8755, February 23 2005.