that the [said Colonel] had not contributed to the disappearance of the guerrilla, Irma Franco, as the determinant participant.” Therefore, the Commander decided that no accusation of criminal responsibility was warranted. However, he acknowledged that, “to date, Irma Franco Pineda, has not appeared,” and therefore ordered that certified copies of the case file be forwarded to the 41st Judge of Military Criminal Investigation to continue the investigation to identity those responsible for her disappearance. 210 167. On May 18, 1992, the Attorney General’s office filed an appeal against the decision of May 12, 1992. 211 On October 22, 1993, the Military Superior Court confirmed the closure of the proceedings in favor of the Colonel, Head of the B-2, owing to the inexistence of the disappearance of Clara Elena Enciso and to the statute of limitations with regard to the criminal action for the offense of the torture of Eduardo Matson Ospino and Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci. The other elements of the judgments were revoked so that the evidence that had been omitted could be collected, and it was ordered that the investigation be reopened against the Commander of the 13th Brigade and that the investigation continue into the fate of Irma Franco Pineda. 212 168. On June 27, 1994, the Special First Instance Court of the General Command of the Military Forces decided that “there are no grounds for convening a court-martial to try the actions of the [Commander of the 13th Brigade], accused of the offenses of homicide and personal injuries,” “and there are no grounds to convene a court-martial to try the actions of the Colonel, Head of the B-2, for the disappearance of […] Irma Franco Pineda.” Consequently, it ordered the closure of the proceedings against both of the accused. 213 On October 3, 1994, the Military Superior Court confirmed that decision, 214 and this concluded the investigation of the events in the military criminal jurisdiction. F.2 Investigations into the disappeared persons 169. In parallel to the investigations described above, in November 1985, the Attorney General’s office opened an inquiry into the “those who presumably disappeared from the Palace of Justice.” 215 On September 15, 1988, the Attorney General’s office concluded that “of the persons rescued alive from the Palace of Justice and taken to the Casa del Florero Museum, only the guerrilla, Irma Franco, and an unidentified guerrilla can be considered 210 Cf. Judgment of the Commander of the Colombian Air Force of May 12, 1992 (evidence file, folios 1588, 1596, 1597, 1603, 1604 and 1606). 211 Cf. Appeal filed by the Attorney General’s Office before the Commander of the Colombian Air Force on May 18, 1992 (evidence file, folio 22145). 212 The court indicated that evidence “requested by the Public Prosecution Service [was missing] that could have an impact on the final decision taken.” In also stated that, with regard to the Commander of the 13th Brigade, it was not possible to declare “either malicious intent or guilt, and therefore [it] revoked the decision of May 12, and ordered the continuation of the investigation.” Cf. Decision of the Military Superior Court of October 22, 1993 (evidence file, folios 20506, 20508, 20507 and 20509). 213 In particular, the court indicated with regard to the disappearance of Irma Franco Pineda that “the investigation had made no progress and the different probative elements that have been collected over eight years have in no way proved that [the Colonel, Head of the B-2], ordered the retention of this woman and, later, her transfer to one of the military facilities of this Operational Unit.” Cf. Military Forces General Command, Head of the Joint Chief of Staff, Special Court of First Instance, Judgment of June 27, 1994 (evidence file folios 1389, 1390 and 1391). 214 Regarding the disappearance of Irma Franco Pineda, the Military Superior Court stated that the Colonel, Head of the B-2, “denied any participation in the disappearance of the guerrilla, Irma Franco, and despite the time that has passed and the evidence collected, there is nothing that directly proves that he was responsible for her disappearance, death, unlawful detention or any other offense against her.” Cf. Judgment of the Military Superior Court of October 3, 1994 (evidence file, folios 1640 and 1641). 215 To this end, the Attorney General created a commission coordinated by the Deputy Attorney General, to which, among other persons, the adviser to his office, Carlos Guana Aguirre, was appointed specially. Cf. Report of September 15, 1988, evaluating the progress made into those presumed disappeared from the Palace of Justice (evidence file folio 31048), and Note of the Deputy Attorney General of October 18, 1989 (evidence file, folio 30650). 57