90. It is clear from the evidence in the case file that Jineth Bedoya was the victim of ongoing threats and attacks against her right to life and humane treatment in connection with the practice of journalism prior to her abduction on May 25, 2000, and that these facts were known to the State authorities. The State was aware, through senior officials of the police, military and protection agencies, of the risk that the journalist faced because of her work covering the situation of the National Model Prison. It is an uncontested fact that the journalist reported on alleged human rights violations and arms trafficking in the prison involving actors in the internal armed conflict, common criminals, and State authorities. 91. In particular, the IACHR notes that on August 25, 1999, the Director of Protection of the DAS sent a written notification to journalist Jineth Bedoya, informing her that the DAS technical committee had carried out a risk assessment, concluding that she faced a substantial risk that could result in harm to her physical integrity, and therefore decided to offer her a security detail. Although Jineth Bedoya agreed to the protection offered by the September 20 communication “because of the resumption of threats against her life,” she never received protection from the State, and the threats continued. In fact, it is an undisputed fact that Jineth Bedoya was forced to leave the country as a protective measure. On her return in October 1999, she again received threats, which she reported to the DAS. In November, she was followed, which she also reported to the DAS. However, as it has been established, on November 24, 1999, the Coordinator of the Protection Department of the Ministry of the Interior notified the journalist that “in response to the request for protection made to this Office [...] it is concluded that your case does not fall within the target population covered by the Protection Program of this Ministry, in accordance with the provisions of Decree 0372 of 1996, Article 32,” and recommended that she go directly to the State security agencies. The IACHR also notes that the origin of these initial threats was not seriously investigated. There is no record in the case file of any criminal investigations opened before May 25, 2000 into these threats and attacks. 92. The Commission also observes that the State knew that journalist Jineth Bedoya could be the victim of an attack against her right to her life and humane treatment as a result of her coverage of the massacre at the National Model Prison and its alleged connection to paramilitary groups. On May 23, 2000, El Espectador journalists Jineth Bedoya, Ignacio Gómez, Jorge Cardona, and Julián Ríos found manila envelopes in their mailboxes that contained threats related to their reporting on the National Model Prison massacre. These facts were brought to the attention of both the police and the Minister of Defense. In addition, on May 24, 2000, journalist Ignacio Gómez was the victim of an attempted kidnapping, which was also reported to the police. As established by the facts and recognized by the State in the instant case, on May 25, 2000 journalist Jineth Bedoya was kidnapped outside a government prison and held for several hours that day. During the kidnapping, the journalist was beaten, threatened, insulted, and subjected to sexual violence by at least three individuals unknown to her. 93. The IACHR considers that, in view of the circumstances of the case and the national context, the risk faced by Jineth Bedoya was real and imminent. Not only had Ms. Bedoya been the victim of numerous threats and attacks, but by the time of the events, dozens of journalists had been attacked and murdered in Colombia for their reporting on matters related to the internal armed conflict. It is appropriate to examine whether the authorities did everything reasonably within their power to prevent that risk from becoming a reality. 94. The Inter-American Commission notes that neither the DAS, nor the National Police, nor the Protection Unit of the Ministry of the Interior, either in coordination or individually, took timely and appropriate measures to prevent acts of violence and intimidation against Jineth Bedoya, in particular to prevent the events of May 25, 2000. On the contrary, in 1999, the Interior Ministry’s Protection Unit denied the victim’s request for protection, and days prior to the kidnapping, the police limited themselves to agreeing with the journalist on negotiation measures with the members of the paramilitary forces. Given the context of lethal violence faced by journalists covering issues of armed conflict in Colombia, the IACHR considers that it was the duty of the national authorities—informed on multiple occasions of the threats against the journalist just before the events of May 25—to act effectively to protect her rights to life, humane treatment, and personal liberty. 95. The Commission concludes that, in the particular circumstances of this case, the authorities failed to take the steps they could reasonably have taken to prevent the occurrence of a certain and imminent 24