release the detained individuals. On the matter, they said that "the only crime we commit is living off our work and in some way fig[ht]ing criminals." Likewise, it mentioned "although it is true that the peasantry, tired of enduring the abuses, robberies, and murders committed by Fredy Marcelo Núñez Naranjo together with his gang of highway robbers, had taken him to the peasant board jail cells." Finally, he added that, "certain that you will respond favorably to this request and not have any issues to that effect, because otherwise, the high level of respect we have for the authorities and the Police, we would not want to get into any trouble or confrontation."82 59. On July 11, 2002, the accused parties filed a remedy of amparo for release against the Fourth Criminal Judge of Tungurahua, before the Superior Court of Justice of Tungurahua. The plaintiffs argued a lack of legal reasoning, violations of due process, and a lack of legal certainty.83 On July 31, 2002, the Second Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Tungurahua granted the amparo remedy, arguing that, although there were sufficient indications to determine that a public action crime existed, there was a lack of clear and precise indications to prove that the accused parties were the perpetrators or accomplices of this crime. According to the Chamber, the information referred to a group of people, which prevented the individual participants from being singled out.84 60. On December 11, 2002, the Fourth Criminal Judge of Tungurahua issued a provisional stay of proceedings, considering that there was no record that the accused parties had been summoned to the evidentiary proceedings during the investigative stage, and also, that there was no evidence to support the "presumption of the existence of the crime" during the investigation stage, therefore no responsibility could be established.85 61. On October 15, 2004, the police chief reported that the investigation was "continu[ing] in this case, with the aim of finding the whereabouts of the missing citizen and [that] the results of the investigation would be ma[de] known to the competent authorities."86 On October 18, the Fourth Criminal Court of Tungurahua certified that, starting from the provisional stay of proceedings issued on December 11, 2002, "no other action has been received from the Prosecutor's Office, up to the present date."87 62. More than 13 years later, on April 27, 2018, the Prosecutor General's Office opened an investigation "into the alleged crime of forced disappearance of persons committed against Fredy Núñez Naranjo"88 in the context of which several procedures have been carried out.89 Cf. Official letter from the Central Board of Peasants No. 88-CJDCQ-2002 addressed to the Fiscal Minister of Tungurahua on June 30, 2002 (case file of evidence, pages 39 and 40). 83 Cf. Habeas corpus petition filed before the Tungurahua Superior Court of Justice on July 11, 2002 (case file of evidence, pages 59 to 67). 84 Cf. Resolution of the Second Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Tungurahua of July 31, 2002 (case file of evidence, pages 75 to 81). 85 Cf. Provisional stay of proceedings order of the Fourth Criminal Court of Tungurahua of December 11, 2002 (case file of evidence, page 48). 86 Cf. Official Letter No. 3585-CP9-2004 from the Chief of the Judicial Police of Tungurahua of October 15, 2004 (case file of evidence, page 86). 87 Cf. Certification of the Fourth Criminal Court of Tungurahua Substitute on October 18, 2004 (case file of evidence, page 229). 88 It is processed under Preliminary Investigation No. 180101820060458. Cf. Prosecutor General's Office Official Letter No. FGE-CGAJP-DDHPC-2023-000903-O, January 31, 2023 (case file of evidence, page 1662). 89 Among which stand out: i) a report from the “Pastaza Criminal Support Unit [...according to which] they do not have information on findings of unidentified bodies NN on the banks of the Pastaza River in 2001 and 2002, as there is no 82 -20-