5. The petitioner states that on June 20, 1992, soldier Juan Alexis Rodríguez Burgos had been sent from the Military Base in the municipality of Paz de Ariporo to the neighboring municipality of Hato Corozal, both in the department of Casanare, to verify the delivery of provisions for two counter-guerrilla commands stationed in Hato Corozal and to receive confidential information. It notes that Juan Alexis Rodríguez, who was dressed in civilian clothing, had presented himself in Hato Corozal to Lt. Erick Rodríguez, telling him of the purpose of his mission, and that he would return on the first bus the next 2 day. 6. According to the petitioner, that night Juan Alexis Rodríguez was consuming alcoholic beverages at an establishment in Hato Corozal where Carlos Arturo Uva Velandia was also socializing with some friends. He states that at that place, Juan Alexis Rodríguez and Carlos Arturo Uva had an altercation, after which Juan Alexis Rodríguez, accompanied by two private citizens, went to the place where one of the counter-guerilla commands was quartered. He notes that at that place, he asked the sentinels at the guard post to let him in, and he asked Lt. Erick Rodríguez, who was in command, to send him with a 3 patrol “because there was an individual looking for a fight.” He indicates that in view of the request and the inebriated state of Juan Alexis Rodríguez, Lt. Erick Rodríguez had ordered him to turn in and go to sleep. 7. He indicates that Juan Alexis Rodríguez expressed acceptance of the order and had turned in. Nonetheless, he notes that Juan Alexis Rodríguez returned to the guard post, where Carlos Arturo Uva was, and had told the two civilians who were accompanying him to leave him alone with the alleged victim, who was allegedly tied up. He indicates that one of the sentinels asked Juan Alexis Rodríguez what he was going to do, and that he answered that he knew how to proceed in such cases, after which the sentinel immediately went to his superior to inform him of what had happened. He indicates that at that moment the sentinel heard the cries for help of Carlos Arturo Uva, after which his corpse was found in a sewer with 14 stab wounds. He indicates that afterwards, Juan Alexis Rodríguez went to the other counter-guerrilla command and reported that he had killed a guerrilla. 8. The petitioner indicates that because of these acts, by order of June 23, 1992, a criminal investigation th was opened before the 120 Court of Military Criminal Investigation of Yopal, department of Casanare, and the pre-trial detention of Juan Alexis Rodríguez was ordered. By decision of February 10, 1993, the Commander of Cavalry Group No. 7, Guías de Casanare (Court of First Instance) issued an order, based th on jurisdiction, to send the proceeding to the Office of Prosecutors of Paz de Ariporo, whose 18 Prosecutor took cognizance of the investigation. On October 19, 1993, a resolution of accusation was issued against Juan Alexis Rodríguez for the crime of aggravated homicide. 9. On May 10, 1994, the Court of Mixed Jurisdiction of the Circuit of Paz de Ariporo found Juan Alexis Rodríguez liable as perpetrator of the homicide of Carlos Arturo Uva and sentenced him to 16 years in prison, the accessory penalty of interdiction of rights and public functions for 10 years, and the payment of 500 grams of gold to the parents of Carlos Arturo Uva, for moral and material damages. The judgment was appealed by both the prosecutorial authorities and the defendant, and on December 19, 1994, the Superior District Court handed down a judgment on appeal affirming the trial court decision in every respect. 10. As for the contentious-administrative proceeding, the petitioner indicates that on March 11, 1993, the next-of-kin of Carlos Arturo Uva filed an action for reparation against the Ministry of Defense. He notes that by judgment of October 12, 1995, the Administrative Tribunal of Casanare denied the complainants’ claims. That Tribunal recognized the commission of “an act that should be repudiated … that fortunately was punished by the regular courts, but that in no way compromises the responsibility of the State, because there is no relationship of causality with the service, because the officers and non-commissioned 2 The petitioner makes reference to the Contentious-Administrative Court of Casanare, Judgment of October 12, 1995. Annex to the initial petition received at the IACHR on October 5, 2000. 3 The petitioner makes reference to the Contentious-Administrative Court of Casanare, Judgment of October 12, 1995. Annex to the initial petition received at the IACHR on October 5, 2000. 2