14 39. Regarding Manuel Guillermo Omeara Miraval: (a) for the acts of torture that he suffered before his death and while he was disappeared; (b) regarding the lack of due diligence in the investigation to search for Mr. Omeara Miraval alive, in light of the report of his kidnapping and subsequent disappearance; (c) for the violation of Article 6 of the ICPPT; (d) for the violation of Article 1(b) of the CIDFP, to the detriment of Mr. Omeara Miraval’s relatives,22 and (e) for the alleged participation of the “Los Prada” paramilitary group in the events. 40. Regarding Héctor Álvarez Sánchez: (a) for the attribution of responsibility to the State for failing to comply with its obligation to prevent the violation of Article 5 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the treaty; (b) for the violation of Article 4 of the Convention, in relation to the obligations of respect and guarantee established in Article 1(1) of said instrument, for the omissions of the State to protect Mr. Álvarez Sánchez’s life and for the evidence of the joint action of state agents and an illegal armed group. 41. Regarding the relatives of Messrs. Omeara Carrascal, Omeara Miraval and Álvarez Sánchez: (a) for the violation of the right to freedom of movement and residence (Article 22(1)) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, for the forced displacement of persons, to the detriment of Carmen Teresa Omeara Miraval, Fabiola Álvarez Solano and Elba Katherine, Claudia Marcela and Manuel Guillermo, all with the surnames Omeara Álvarez, for failing to comply with their obligation to protect the immediate family and prevent forced displacement; (b) for the breach of the duty to investigate the facts with due diligence, in relation to investigation of Mr. Omeara Carrascal due to the lack of diligence in the criminal proceedings, except on his late inclusion in the criminal proceedings, and regarding the Mr. Omeara Miraval in relation to the complaint of his kidnapping and subsequent disappearance. Regarding Mr. Álvarez Sánchez, the State only recognized its responsibility in the period from October 21, 1994, to March 2003; c) for failure to comply with the reasonable timeframe, considering the undue delays in criminal investigations. Also, with regard to the investigation in the military criminal justice system and the disciplinary investigation related to Mr. Omeara Miraval; (d) for the violation of the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection due to the lack of connection and coordination between the investigations, and that the facts of the three victims were causally related; (e) for the alleged violation of the right to honor and dignity (Article 11(2)) of the Convention. 42. Additionally, Colombia indicated that it "acknowledged its responsibility, and that as a consequence of the international responsibility of the States, since they are involved in an internationally unlawful act, the victims must be compensated" for the violations committed to their rights and carried out various considerations on the different measures requested by the Commission and the representatives, related to the determination of possible reparations, costs and expenses, some of which remain in dispute. Therefore, the Court will examine and rule on these in the corresponding chapter. 43. Finally, considering the seriousness of the facts and alleged violations, as well as taking into account the powers incumbent on this Court as an international body for the protection of human rights, the Court will proceed to establish both the broad and specific events that occurred, since this contributes to the reparation for the victims, to preventing the repetition of similar events and to satisfying the purposes of the inter-American jurisdiction on human rights.23 The Court will also open the corresponding chapters to analyze and specify, as 22 The State considered that the disappearance and death was diligently investigated from the beginning and that after the date of the events the State deposited the ratification of said instrument. 23 Case of Tiu Tojín v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 26, 2008. Series C No. 190, para. 24, and Case of Escaleras Mejía et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 25.