decision, it was decided “to abstain from opening […] a formal criminal investigation [against two sergeants and a soldier] for the acts attributed to them.”127 C.2) Regarding the threats and harassments after August 29, 1996 C.2.a) Disciplinary investigation by the Attorney General's Office 108. On September 11, 1996 the Editor-in-Chief of Noticiero Colombia 12:30 forwarded a brief to the National Director of Special Investigations of the Attorney General’s Office asking him “to clarify” what had happened the previous day when “four men in a red Toyota” “arrived at the home of [Luis Gonzalo Vélez Restrepo,] cameraman of the [said] news program” and “said that they worked for the Attorney General’s Office, but failed to present any identification, and questioned his wife, inquiring about Luis Gonzalo’s schedule and activities.”128 109. In a report of September 17, 1996, two “commissioned officers” informed the Coordinator of the Human Rights Unit of the National Special Investigations Directorate of the Attorney General’s Office of the results of the interview with Mr. Vélez Restrepo and his wife. During this interview, the latter had expressed their concern about “incidents that [had been] occur[ring] at their place of residence, such as the presence of individuals asking about their daily activities,” and Mrs. Román Amariles also referred to “the presence of […] unknown individuals in their home, who arrived in a red vehicle,” and who asked about Mr. Vélez Restrepo’s routine and “said that they were from the Attorney General’s Office.” In this report, the said officials recommended to the Coordinator of the Human Rights Unit that “he forward to the Prosecutor General’s Office or else to the Administrative Department of Security (DAS)” this information on the situation of the Vélez Román family so that one of these institutions could provide them with protection. On September 24, 1996, the Director of the Human Rights Unit of the Attorney General’s Office signed a note addressed to the Director of the DAS, informing him of Mr. Vélez Restrepo’s situation “for the effects that your Department may consider pertinent.”129 110. On October 6, 1997, the Attorney General’s Office received a brief dated September 29, 1997, in which the Colombian Commission of Jurists denounced “the situation of anxiety that the cameraman of Noticiero Colombia 12:30 [Luis Gonzalo Vélez Restrepo] and his family are experiencing, specifically because he is the object of harassment and threats, which he contends are related to video recordings he made just this last year [sic] while performing his professional activities and during the peasant marches in the department of Caquetá, material that was widely broadcast by the media and that reveals the ill-treatment of the marchers and the cameraman himself by units of the National Army.”130 Among the 127 Decision issued October 3, 1997, by the 122nd Military Criminal Court of First Instance, San Vicente del Caguán (Caquetá), supra note 124, folio 193. 128 Cf. letter of September 11, 1996, signed by Hans Sarmiento, Editor-in-Chief of Noticiero Colombia 12:30, addressed to the National Director of Special Investigations of the Attorney General’s Office, supra note 99, folio 62. 129 Cf. case file 286969, report dated September 17, 1996, addressed by two officials of the Human Rights Unit of the National Special Investigations Directorate of the Attorney General’s Office to the Coordinator of the Human Rights Unit with regard to mandate No. 0171, and note of September 24, 1996, signed by the Director of the Human Rights Unit of the Attorney General’s Office addressed to the Director of the DAS (file of useful evidence presented by the State on August 13, 2012, tome IV, folios 1719 and 1720). 130 Cf. note issued on October 10, 1997 by the Human Rights Unit of the National Special Investigations Directorate of the Attorney General’s Office (file of annexes to Merits Report 136/10, tome I, annex 12, folios 67 and 68), and letter addressed by the Colombian Commission of Jurists to the Attorney General’s Office on September 29, 1997 (file of the processing of the case before the Commission, tome II, folios 912 and 913). 36