had been no real, effective and lasting response by the State designed to combat impunity.58 According to the National Center for Historical Memory, 99.51 per cent of the documented cases between 1958 and 2018 remained unpunished.59 Thus, the failure to effectively investigate each case and punish those responsible facilitated the context of political violence described and the practice of forced disappearances. A.4 Conclusion regarding the context 69. Based on the evidence presented, the Court finds that a situation of political violence existed in Colombia in 1993 and, in that context, that numerous human rights violations occurred, including forced disappearances, perpetrated by the State and by non-State agents with the State’s acquiescence, as part of the so-called “national security doctrine” in effect at the time, under which individuals were identified as “the enemy within” based on their activities or ideology, including militants of leftist political parties and trade unionists. The situation was facilitated by a context of impunity. B) Disappearance of Pedro Julio Movilla Galarcio 70. Pedro Julio Movilla Galarcio was a trade unionist and political militant of the MarxistLeninist Communist Party of Colombia and the Popular Front. During his youth, he participated in the Colombian student movement. When he worked for the Colombian Agrarian Reform Institute (INCORA), in Montería, before 1977, he was a member of the organization’s union, holding positions on its board of directors. 60 In 1987, he moved to Bogotá with his family, where he was self-employed.61 As a young man, he entered into a relationship with Candelaria Nuris Vergara Carriazo, to whom he was married at the time of his disappearance. They had three children together: Jenny del Carmen Movilla Vergara, José Antonio Movilla Vergara and Carlos Julio Movilla Vergara. A number of other people also formed part of their family (including those mentioned supra, in paragraph 54). B.1 Facts prior to the disappearance of Pedro Julio Movilla Galarcio 71. Candelaria Nuris Vergara Carriazo stated that she and her husband were harassed when they lived in Montería.62 She said that when he worked for INCORA and began his union activities, he was detained for two months after attending a meeting, and subsequently they noticed different vehicles parked in front of the family residence. 63 She added that the harassment Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for 2016. Chapter V. OEA/Ser.L/V/11, March 2017, para. 47. Document cited by the Commission in its Merits Report (paragraph 16, footnote 12). 59 Human Rights Everywhere (HREV) (2019). Cartografía de la desaparición forzada en Colombia. Relato (siempre) incompleto de lo invisibilizado (evidence files, Annex 7 to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 2903 to 2987). 60 The representatives also pointed out that Pedro Movilla “was a member of the Popular Workers’ Committee of the Department of Córdoba and worked with the Association of Teachers and Education Workers of Córdoba (ADEMACOR).” Candelaria Vergara also confirmed the facts in her oral testimony during the public hearing on February 15, 2022, as well as in written statements given in Colombia (cf. Prosecutor General’s Office. Additional statement given by Ms. Vergara on June 7, 2012 (evidence file, Annex 1 to the Merits Report, folios 9-12)). 61 Statement rendered by Candelaria Vergara on May 21, 1993, before the Inspector General’s Office (evidence file, process before the Commission, folios 1248 to 1250). 62 Statement rendered by Candelaria Vergara on May 21, 1993, before the Inspector General’s Office (evidence file, process before the Commission, folios 1248 to 1250); and Ms. Vergara’s oral testimony during the public hearing held on February 15, 2022. 63 Oral testimony of Candelaria Vergara during the hearing on February 15, 2022. When asked to give the date or year in which Pedro Movilla worked as a trade unionist and experienced harassment, she explained that she was “talking about the year 1974 and the decades of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.” When asked about the last trade union of which Pedro Movilla was a member, she said he was “a member of INCORA, then the Popular Workers’ Committee.” She also explained that “in the different regional branches where we were, Bogotá, also Santander, he was no longer a union leader as such.” She emphasized, in the same reply, that “Pedro’s activity was political, he was a leader of the Marxist58 20