246. On April 6, 2005, the Ministry of the Interior and Justice informed the court of first instance that it had ordered the reference to the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective in its 2003 management report to be removed from the website of the DNE.474 The foregoing until the matter had been settled judicially.475 247. In a brief dated April 8, 2005, the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective challenged the decision at first instance.476 248. On May 11, 2005, the Disciplinary Chamber of the Superior Council of the Judiciary decided to modify the decision to refuse the action for protection and instead declared it out of order.477 In the opinion of the Chamber, the fact that the action for protection had been filed 13 months after the events occurred was incompatible with the immediacy requirement of the constitutional action.478 249. On October 20, 2005, the Constitutional Court returned a judgment after examining the ruling of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Superior Council of the Judiciary under appeal.479 With regard to the statements of the president in September 2003, the Court considered that the alleged violation of the individual rights invoked by the suing organization was not present in the speech of September 8, 2003, as the Constitutional Court had held in Judgment T-1191 of 2004, since "in this specific case sufficient evidence [was not found] to conclude that the accusations of the president were specifically directed at the nongovernmental organizations here suing," which included the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective.480 250. In relation to the statements of the president in February 2004, the Constitutional Court found that there was nothing in the speech to suggest a direct allusion to the work of the Lawyers' Collective or its members.481 There is no evidence in the record that directly shows that the president of the Republic made the statements that he is said to have made or that, if he did, he referred in them to the Lawyers' Collective or any of its members.482 251. Regarding the reference to CCAJAR on the DNE website, the Court said that until a decision had been adopted by a competent judicial authority settling the matter, the DNE was barred from publishing any information on its website that might endanger the physical integrity of that organization's members.483 252. Based on the foregoing, the court vacated the decision of second instance that declared the action for protection out of order for failing to meet the immediacy requirement, and confirmed the decision at first instance denying the protection sought.484 253. The Court also held that the fact that no harm was found to the members of CCAJAR did not exempt the head of government or any public servant from fulfilling the duties associated with the protection of the rights of such groups, including the obligation to refrain from making unfounded statements that might unjustifiably endanger the human rights protection activities in which they engage.485 4. Communications sent by CCAJAR to the presidents between 1999 and 2015, and to the vice president in 2002 254. On August 25, 1999, CCAJAR sent a communication to then-President Andrés Pastrana Arango in relation to threats contained in pamphlets and to statements made against human rights defenders by a highJudgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 476 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 477 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 478 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 479 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 480 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 481 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 482 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 483 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 484 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 485 Judgment T-1062/05 of the Constitutional Court, October 20, 2005. Enclosed with the State's communication of November 1, 2006. 474 475 48