105 arrest without a court order, which I refused to do because I would be or was breaking the law, so I told him that I could not do it. Then, as a reprisal he decided to dismiss me from that position, to conduct an investigation, to fabricate crimes that I had never committed. Afterwards, they made it public in all the media, both in the written press and on television, that I am a criminal, and surveillance became more intense, and there were five attempts against my life in which friends of mine were also wounded by bullets, and I could not live at my house because my house was being watched and it was also being fired at, and this forced me into exile in Canada. And well, I would like to say that I am alive when, according to the patterns and procedures that were designed at one time by the intelligence bodies, I should be dead like my colleague Mérida Escobar died. And I would like to say that my only sin, our only sin was to receive orders and carry out our functions as policemen. 192. It has also been established in the instant Judgment that three witness in the criminal proceeding were harassed and threatened, their lives and personal safety were at risk, and they decided to go into exile in Canada. Two of the witnesses, Juan Marroquín Tejeda and José Tejeda Hernández, recognized one of the two attackers of Myrna Mack Chang as Noel de Jesús Beteta Álvarez; and witness Virgilio Rodríguez noted that the victim’s house was being watched by at least three individuals, one of whom was Noel de Jesús Beteta Álvarez (supra para. 134.99). In this regard, Virgilio Rodríguez testified before the Court that when he read in the newspaper that the policeman who had interviewed him “had been machine-gunned at the corner of the General Directorate of the Police,” he decided to leave the country because “I thought that what happened to that person was also going to happen to me” (supra para. 127.b). 193. The above leads to the conclusion that the murder of policeman José Mérida Escobar, the harassment and threats against Judge Henry Monroy Andrino and witnesses Julio Pérez Ixcajop, Juan Marroquín Tejeda, José Tejeda Hernández, Virgilio Rodríguez and Rember Larios Tobar was aimed at making them fearful so that they would desist from cooperating in the search for the truth and, therefore, to obstruct the judicial development of the proceeding to punish all those responsible for the extra-legal execution of Myrna Mack Chang. 194. With respect to the staff of the Myrna Mack Foundation and of AVANCSO, they were also harassed and threatened several times, for which reason the Commission asked the Court to adopt provisional measures in favor of the former, and this Court decided to adopt them (supra para. 58). 195. Likewise, the next of kin of Myrna Mack Chang have suffered numerous threats and acts of harassment. Specifically, Helen Mack Chang, sister of the victim, has suffered them constantly and, in response to a request by the Commission for provisional measures in her favor, the Court ordered the State to adopt such measures as might be necessary to protect her life and her right to humane treatment (supra para. 58). After hearing the testimony and expert opinions during the public hearing at its seat, this Court, upon its own motion, ordered the State to adopt provisional measures in favor of the following immediate next of kin of the victim: Zoila Chang Lau, the mother; Marco Mack Chang, brother; Freddy Mack Chang, brother; Vivian Mack Chang, sister; Ronald Chang Apuy, cousin; Lucrecia Hernández Mack, daughter; and the children of the latter (supra para. 61). At the same time, the Court also ordered expansion of the provisional measures in favor of expert witness Iduvina Hernández, who rendered her statement before this Court (supra para. 61).