On December 23, 2004, the Seventh Prosecutorial Unit requested CICPC to carry out ballistics tests on the weapon and pieces of lead recovered through an on-site inspection on January 1, 2001, as well as the ballistics tests on the weapons used by the officials Juan Rojas and Valdemar Rodríguez on the same date. On June 9, 2005, the Seventh Prosecutorial Unit, “in order to conclude the investigation,” requested the CICPC to order the following complementary steps: reconstruction of the facts and the planimetric survey of the scene of the crime, summons of the owner or responsible party for the residence where the incidents took place, summons of the seven members allegedly participating in the operation to provide witness testimony, summons of some of the relatives of Néstor José Uzcátegui to provide witness testimony, and photographs of the place of the events. On October 4, 2005, an official belonging to the subdelegation of the CICPC reported that the evidence was withdrawn from the Department of Recovered Objects, where two bags containing evidence were found. One bag was found in good condition and the other in poor condition and the evidence was wet. He also indicated that much of the evidence was on the floor of the warehouse with the packages compressed. As a result, the evidence was removed from the warehouse, when the minimal conditions for protection were not met given the water filter on the roof. On October 11, 2005, the Seventh Prosecutorial Unit made official record of having conducted an on-site inspection of the warehouse, finding a deteriorated bag with wet and compressed evidence, the state of which impeded the respective visualization and identification. On October 24, 2005, the chief of the CICPC subdelegation reported, “The exact location of the evidence is unknown due to the impossibility of individually identifying the elements.” 22. According to the petitioners, the summarized steps are the latest actions recorded in the file held at the Seventh Prosecutorial Unit. 23. Additionally, they indicated that Luís Uzcátegui has submitted his statements on the case and has publicly spoken out against the State’s inactivity in the investigations in the regional newspapers “La Mañana” and “El Falconiano” as well as before the Commission of Social Affairs and Citizen Participation of the Regional Legislative Council of Falcón State, the Public Ministry of Falcón State, and the Legislative Assembly of the same State. 24. The petitioners added that, as a result of the activity undertaken by Luís Uzcátegui with respect to the death of his brother, he had been affected in his personal integrity and liberty, especially through a series of illegal and arbitrary detentions, alleged acts of torture, and physical aggression, as well as alleged threats to his life and other forms of harassment and intimidation, a situation resulting in him being granted precautionary and provisional measures by the Inter-American Commission and Court, respectively. 25. The petitioners provided an extensive description of these events to the detriment of Luís Uzcátegui, including: On March 15, 2001, FSPF officials searched Mr. Luis Uzcátegui’s home without a court order. The officials knocked down the door and slapped Mr. Uzcátegui’s younger brother, a minor, Carlos Eduardo Uzcátegui, while telling him: “Tell your brother to stop speaking out against us, or we will do to him just what we did to your other brother.” On September 10, 2001, Mr. Luís Uzcátegui began to receive anonymous telephone calls at his bedroom telephone as well as at his place of work in the Regional Legislative Council of Falcón State. On the first call to his home, a male voice warned him: “Retire 5