50. On February 19, 1999, another individual was arrested, and he gave a formal statement at his initial appearance on March 13, 1999. As the alleged direct perpetrator of the murder, he was ordered to remain in pretrial detention to ensure his appearance during the criminal investigation.25 51. On March 1, 1999, Judith Carvajal Carvajal sent a complaint to the Regional Office of the Public Prosecutor alleging that the defense attorneys in her brother’s case had violated the confidentiality of the pretrial phase of the criminal proceeding by turning over copies of some of the proceedings conducted during that phase to various individuals in Pitalito who were not defendants in the case. She indicated that this seriously jeopardized the confidentiality of the identity of witnesses and key individuals in the investigation. She also maintained that the order determining the legal status of the defendants began to circulate “as if it were some kind of public press release” and that it was “used to create anxiety and panic among the witnesses and the general public so they would retract their statements or decline to cooperate with the justice system in the development of the case.”26 52. On March 29, 1999, the Regional Prosecutor’s Office ordered that a certified copy of the case file be forwarded to the competent authority in order for it to investigate the possible violation of confidentiality that was the subject of Judith Carvajal’s complaint.27 The file before the IACHR contains no record of the outcome of that investigation. 53. On May 6 and June 18, 1999, the Regional Prosecutor’s Office denied requests to lift the pretrial detention measures imposed against two defendants in the case. On August 12, 1999 it denied the request to lift the pretrial detention measures against the former mayor of Pitalito.28 54. On August 24, 1999, in Order 00566, the Office of the Prosecutor General reassigned the investigation from the Unit of the Office of the Public Prosecutor assigned to the Specialized Criminal Judges of the Bogotá Circuit to the National Unit of Human Rights Prosecutors.29 Nevertheless, according to what was stated by the Criminal Judgment Division of the Superior Court for the Judicial District, on September 7, 1999 jurisdiction over the case was once again assumed by the Regional Prosecutor’s Office assigned to the Specialized Criminal Judges of the Circuit.30 55. On November 2, 1999, the Criminal Division to Clear Case Backlog of the Unit assigned to the Bogotá Court adjudicated the appeal of the denial of the request to lift the pretrial detention measures imposed against the former mayor of Pitalito. The Division ruled to lift the pretrial detention measures against the mayor, and ordered his release.31 According to the statements of the Public Ministry at the public adjudication hearing on November 29, 2000, the former mayor was granted pretrial release because of the possibility “that the journalist may have been murdered by members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces 25 Attachment 4. Superior Court for the Judicial District. Criminal Judgment Division. Judgment of April 6, 2001. p. 3. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of October 17, 2002. 26 Attachment 15. Complaint filed with the Regional Office of the Public Prosecutor regarding risk to Judith Carvajal Carvajal. March 1, 1999. Received by the Regional Prosecutor’s Office on March 3, 1999. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of August 25, 2005. 27 Attachment 17. Office of the Prosecutor General. File: 33744. Bogotá. March 29, 1999. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of August 25, 2005. 28 Attachment 4. Superior Court for the Judicial District. Criminal Judgment Division. Judgment of April 6, 2001. p. 3-4. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of October 17, 2002. 29 Attachment 23. Order 00566 of the Office of the Prosecutor General, August 24, 1999. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of August 25, 2005. 30 Attachment 4. Superior Court for the Judicial District. Criminal Judgment Division. Judgment of April 6, 2001. p. 4. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of October 17, 2002. 31 Attachment 4. Superior Court for the Judicial District. Criminal Judgment Division. Judgment of April 6, 2001. p. 4. Attachment to the petitioner’s communication of October 17, 2002.