3 Adjudge and declare that the State of Colombia has violated articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, to the detriment of Artemio Pantoja Ordóñez, Hernán Javier Cuarán, Julio Milciades Cerón Gómez, Edebraiz Cerón Rojas, Wilian Hamilton Cerón Rojas, Hernán Lizcano Jacanamejoy [and], and Moisés Ojeda, and their next of kin. Adjudge and declare that with its violations to the rights to life, to a fair trial, and to judicial protection, the State of Colombia has also violated its obligation under Article 1(1) of the Convention, which is to respect and ensure the rights recognized therein. Order the State of Colombia: a) to conduct a rapid, impartial and effective judicial investigation into the facts denounced and punish all those responsible. b) to determine whether the other person that the National Police extrajudicially executed on January 23, 1991, was Hernán Lizcano Jacanamejoy or Moisés Ojeda. The Honorable Court is also asked to order the State of Colombia to conduct a serious investigation to determine the circumstances under which the seventh fatality occurred. The Commission did not arrive at any finding on this death. c) to make full reparation to the victims’ next of kin, including payment of a just compensation (deducting the amounts already paid in pecuniary damages in the administrative-law cases of Artemio Pantoja Ordóñez, Hernán Javier Cuarán Muchavisoy, Julio Milcíades Cerón Gómez, Edebraiz Cerón Rojas and Wilian Hamilton Cerón Rojas) and to restore the victims’ good name for posterity. d) to adopt any amendments needed in the regulations and training programs of the Colombian armed forces, so that all military operations are conducted in accordance with the international instruments and international practice in the matter of domestic armed conflicts. e) to pay the expenses and costs that the victims’ next of kin have incurred to litigate this case in local fora and before the Commission and the Court, and the reasonable fees of their attorneys. II COMPETENCE 4. Colombia has been a State Party to the American Convention since July 31, 1973. On June 21, 1985, it accepted this Court’s contentious jurisdiction. The Court is, therefore, competent under the terms of Article 62(3) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) to take up the merits of the present case. III PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COMMISSION 5. On January 27, 1994, the Commission received a petition alleging human rights violations. The aggrieved parties were Artemio Pantoja Ordóñez, Hernán Javier Cuarán Muchavisoy, Julio Milciades Cerón Gómez, Edebraes Norverto Cerón Rojas, Wilian Hamilton Cerón Rojas, one unidentified person (possibly either Moisés Ojeda or Hernán Lizcano Jacanamejoy), and one other unidentified person. The circumstances surrounding the death of the last of these persons were unknown. On February 16, 1994, the Commission forwarded the pertinent parts of the complaint to the State and requested the State’s answer.