on Mr. Movilla.191 Subsequently, however, during proceedings of investigation conducted on January 21 and February 5 and 7, 2020 (supra para. 102), documentation was found alluding to “Milton,” the pseudonym used by Mr. Movilla. 166. This shows that the Army did possess information about Mr. Movilla, but had denied it. Therefore, while it may have responded to the requests it received, it hindered the investigative process by denying it had any information. This conclusion suggests lack of due diligence in the internal investigations, in addition to other instances that have already been established (supra paras. 32, 34, 39, 142 to 148 and 162). All this affects the right to the truth. 167. Therefore, although this Court views positively the actions that have been carried out by the State to ascertain Pedro Movilla’s whereabouts and to establish who was responsible for his disappearance, the fact is that more than 29 years have elapsed and those purposes have not been achieved. The Court holds that the right to the truth of Pedro Movilla’s relatives cannot be deemed to have been satisfied as long as this situation continues. Therefore, Colombia has violated their right to the truth. C) Conclusion 168. Therefore, based on the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility and its implications, as well as the other assessments carried out, the Court concludes that the State has violated the rights to judicial guarantees and to judicial protection of Pedro Julio Movilla Galarcio, Candelaria Nuris Vergara Carriazo, Carlos Julio Movilla Vergara, José Antonio Movilla Vergara, Jenny del Carmen Movilla Vergara, Leonor María Movilla de Sierra, María de Jesús Movilla Barrera, Florencia Movilla Galarcio, Rita Candelaria Movilla Galarcio, Nery del Carmen Movilla Galarcio, Erasmo de la Barrera Movilla, Raúl Rafael Ramos Movilla, Ricardo Adolfo Ramos Movilla, Franklin Hander Movilla, Dominga Josefa Movilla Galarcio, Iván Darío Vega Movilla, Nery del Carmen Vega Movilla, Ana Karina Vega Movilla and María Isabel Carriazo de Román. Colombia violated, to their detriment, Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1), as well as Article I b) of the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons. The State also violated the right to the truth, to the detriment of these same relatives of Pedro Movilla, based on the violation of Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to its Article 1(1). Cf. National Army, Military Intelligence Combat Support Command, Communication of March 20, 2018 (evidence file, Annex 22 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 4978). 191 45