5 17. The brief by the representatives, received on October 18, 2005, providing additional information on the alleged forced disappearance of Mr. Orlando Valencia, beneficiary of the provisional measures. They informed that in the morning of October 15, 2005, the vehicle in which Mr. Valencia was riding was intercepted by the National Police and he was taken to the police station of Belén de Bajirá for questioning. After his release, while he was heading to the house of another resident of the Curbaradó basin, in the afternoon of that same day and, paramilitary gunmen on a motorcycle, forced Mr. Orlando Valencia to climb onto the vehicle and took him along the road leading from Belén de Bajirá to Barranquillita. In this regard, the representatives stated that “the complicity of Bajirá police, whether by act or omission, in this forced disappearance is evident. Paramilitary and police operations […] take place in the same geographic area. Both police and […] paramilitary forces were involved in the kidnapping operation,” and they attributed Mr. Orlando Valencia’s forced disappearance to the “execution of […] threats issued by the military during paramilitary operations directed against the Afro-descendants.” 18. The brief by the Commission, received on December 30, 2005, in which they included their comments on the report submitted by the State and pointed out, inter alia, that: a) “on October 15, 2005, members of paramilitary groups kidnapped and murdered Mr. Orlando Valencia, beneficiary of the provisional measures, whose body was not found until October 22, 2005” and stated that “Mr. Valencia was one of the candidates for the legal representation of the Consejo Mayor (General Council) of Curbaradó.” Therefore, the Commission considered it necessary that the State make a statement regarding these incidents and the allegations concerning State agents’ involvement, in light of the obligation to protect the members of the Communities; b) the accounts of witnesses regarding the arrest of Mr. Valencia, “which served as a prelude to his kidnapping and murder by a paramilitary group”, indicated that he would have allegedly been questioned and harassed by the Belén de Bajirá Police in relation to his involvement in the complaint regarding the illegal planting of African palm. Therefore, it is necessary to call attention to the State’s failure to comply with the obligation to protect the individuals who reported the illegal plantation of African palm. The Commission reiterated its opinion regarding the connection between the planting of the palm in the communal property of the beneficiaries and the incidents of threats, harassment and violence against them. c) protection mechanisms involve an early warning and rapid reaction system, which depends on elements such as the use of satellite communication devices. This obligation has not been efficiently fulfilled by the State in light of the situation facing the Communities; d) the State made no reference in its report to the presence of oversight bodies, such as the Colombian Public Prosecutor's Office or to the appointment of a permanent Community Ombudsman in the area of the Communities; e) the State makes no reference to special protection being afforded to humanitarian refuge areas. In this regard, the Commission received information in October 2005 of incursions made by members of the army accompanied by civilians in the humanitarian areas to steal cattle and destroy demarcations, and expressed its concern over this situation insofar as it is incompatible with the protection obligations of the State in this matter; f) in its report, the State referred to a series of activities in connection with the delivery of humanitarian assistance; however, it failed to mention whether