103. With regard to search actions, on May 12, 2020, the 190th Specialized Prosecutor officially asked the Group for the Search, Identification and Handover of Disappeared Persons (GRUBE) and the Unit for the Search for Missing Persons (UBPD) to “draw up a joint plan for the search, identification and handover of Pedro Julio Movilla Delgado” (sic).122 On May 29, 2020, the UBPD reported that the case of Pedro Movilla was already registered with it. It asked the Prosecutor’s Office for its files so it could study all the available information.123 On July 16, 2020, the FGN ordered an inspection of the facilities of the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences to study the albums of unidentified bodies and determine whether Pedro Movilla might be among them.124 On July 23, 2020, the GRUBE was asked to carry out a biological comparison of the samples taken from Mr. Movilla’s relatives and the unidentified corpses being held at the laboratories of the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences and the CTI. 125 The State reported that in September 2020 the UBPD had spoken to Candelaria Vergara and one of her children. On November 20, 2020, an inter-institutional meeting was held, with the participation of the civil party, to agree on a search plan for Pedro Movilla.126 The State reported that other actions were carried out. On October 10, 2020, the genetic data of Mr. Movilla’s relatives was cross-referenced against the records of the Bank of Genetic Profiles of Disappeared Persons, but no match was found. A database search was also carried out, including the Information System of the Network on Disappeared Persons and Corpses (SIRDEC). Colombia also reported that Pedro Movilla had also been included in the “Regional Plan for the Search for Persons Disappeared by Political Leaders in the city of Bogotá.”127 104. Based on everything described above and the information available to this Court, the investigation remains at a preliminary stage. It appears that a person was “linked” to the case who made a statement during the preliminary investigation, without his status in the proceedings being defined. Furthermore, since 2020 search actions have been carried out that have failed to discover Pedro Movilla’s whereabouts or, were it to be the case, to identify his remains. C.3 The petition for a writ of habeas corpus before the criminal court judge 105. On May 18, 1993, a lawyer for CCAJAR filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the judge of Bogotá’s 54th Circuit Criminal Court on Mr. Movilla’s behalf, which was declared inadmissible the following day because it did not indicate the place where the disappeared person was detained, and the authorities from whom the Court requested information had no report to the effect that he had been detained.128 Cf. FGN, Procedural Decision of the 190th Specialized Prosecutor of May 12, 2020 (evidence file, Annex 23 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5247). 123 Cf. UBPD, Communication of May 28, 2020 (evidence file, Annex 23 to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 5255 to 5257). 124 Cf. FGN, Procedural Decision of July 16, 2020 (evidence file, Annex 23 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5265). 125 FGN, Procedural Decision of the 190th Specialized Prosecutor of July 23, 2020 (evidence file, Annex 23 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5267). 126 The 190th Specialized Prosecutor, the Prosecutor responsible for Coordinating GRUBE, a GRUBE investigator, the Coordinator of the Information Group on Deceased and Disappeared Persons and Unidentified Corpses - Bogotá Regional Directorate of the Legal Medicine Institute, the Criminal Judicial Prosecutor II, and the representative of the civil party. Various actions were agreed aimed at “drawing up the search plan.” (Cf. FGN, document entitled “Interinstitutional proceedings of investigation. Search plan. Pedro Julio Movilla Galarcio” (evidence file, Annex 23 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5356). 127 It explained that “this plan aims to ascertain the whereabouts of persons who disappeared within the framework of political persecution in the city of Bogotá during the 1980s and 1990s.” 128 Cf. Decision of the Fifty-fourth Circuit Criminal Court of May 19, 1993 (evidence file, Annex 16 to the Merits Report, files forwarded by the representatives, folios 3473 to 3475). 122 28