65 213. Another common element has to do with the complete lack of information indicating that there was some kind of fighting between paramilitary groups and law enforcement entities or any type of response from these law enforcement entities to protect the civilian population against the sequence of incidents that were being perpetrated by paramilitary groups. This sequence of violent events takes place precisely in the context described above of ties between the Self-Defense Forces of Magdalena Medio and law enforcement entities working in the area. 214. To all of the above must be added the voluntary confessions provided by Ramón Isaza, where it is evident there were not only ties in the area at the time of the incidents, but also widespread coordination between law enforcement entities and the Self-Defense Forces of Magdalena Medio when perpetrating the sequence of events that are part of the present case.. That is how Isaza mentioned that there was a list of persons who were supposedly collaborating with the guerrilla that had been drawn up by the National Army, and he linked that list with the events of the present case. 215. With all of these elements, the Commission deems it is not possible to consider each one of the facts separately as proposed by the State of Colombia. The entire information appearing in the case file makes it possible for the Commission to reach the conviction that it involved a sequence of events aimed at dismantling networks allegedly supporting the guerrilla in Vereda La Esperanza and that there are many elements that make it possible to conclude that these events took place with the acquiescence and collaboration of law enforcement entities, except for the incident of June 26, 1996, where the Army is directly involved. 216. On the basis of these considerations linking the incidents together, the Commission shall refer to each one and their consequences under the American Convention. 6.1. Jesús Castaño Gallego and Óscar Hemel Zuluaga Marulanda 217. According to proven facts, Jesus Castaño and Oscar Zuluaga were took into custody on June 21, 1996 and, to date, their whereabouts are unknown. The Commission has several statements indicating that Mr. Castaño had been accused by the military of selling groceries to the guerrilleros, who had even threatened Mr. Gallego shortly before his disappearance. Furthermore, the IACHR notes that the motor vehicles used by the persons responsible for the events had been used by the military on previous occasions. 218. On the basis of a joint review of these elements, as well as of the context in which the incidents occurred in Vereda La Esperanza, the Commission deems that military personnel collaborated with the Self-Defense Forces of Magdalena Medio to execute the forced disappearance of Aníbal de Jesús Castaño Gallego and Oscar Zuluaga Marulanda. As a result, the IACHR concludes that the State of Colombia violated the rights to personal liberty, personal integrity, life and recognition as a person before the law enshrined in Articles 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the American Convention in connection with the obligations set forth in Article 1.1 of the same instrument; as well as article I.a) of the Inter-American Convention on The Forced Disappearance of Persons, to the detriment of Aníbal de Jesús Castaño Gallego and Oscar Zuluaga. 219. Furthermore, the IACHR notes that Óscar Zuluaga was 15 years old when he went missing. Thus, the Commission deems that, in the present case, the State of Colombia disregarded its obligation to provided special protection to children, especially in a context of armed conflict. Because