4 arrest them, although they were repeatedly urged to do so. 12. The public prosecutor, Lic. de Cansinos, spent the whole of the following day in the military base of Huehuetenango. 13. Two other witnesses to the Colotenango events, MARÍA GARCÍADOMINGO and ALBERTO GODÍNEZ, have been formally charged with the death of a child. The trial began three days later, on May 14, 1994. Alberto Godínez gave testimony proving his innocence and was released. 14. The private prosecutor in this case, Lic. Rudio Lecsan Mérida-Herrera, also serves as such in the case against the two other witnesses ARTURO FEDERICO MÉNDEZ-ORTIZ and ALFONSO MORALES-JIMÉNEZ and is counsel for the defense of the civil patrolmen detained as a result of the events of Colotenango. 15. That same week, on May 16, 1994, RAMIRO GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, another of the witnesses of Colotenango whose parents had been murdered by civil patrols on September 23 (see paragraph 5), was severely beaten. As a result of the beating, Ramiro Godínez suffered serious injuries. The attack was committed by civil patrols and Mr. Godínez had to be hospitalized in Huehuetenango. The victim has not filed charges for fear of further reprisals by the civil patrols, who can count upon the unconditional support of the authorities at the military base of Huehuetenango. 16. Witness NATIVIDAD GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, the sister of Ramiro Godínez, has been forced to leave the community because of the threats she has received. 17. As a result of these attacks, other witnesses who had intended to testify are now refusing to come forward for fear of re-prisals. 18. Legal proceedings against the civil associations which support the demonstrators and their grievances were initiated on May 16 before the Second Trial Court of Huehuetenango, charging those groups with sedition. It is a criminal complaint brought against the (Comité de Unidad Campesina "CUC" (Committee of Peasant Unit), the Coordinadora Nacional de Viudas de Guatemala "CONAVIGUA" (National Coordinator of Guatemalan Widows) and the Mayan Defense Office, all of which are charged with "sedition." It is assumed that the complaint is intended to intimidate those groups which are active in furthering the trial of those responsible for the Colotenango attacks. The denouncers point out that the complaint is without merit, since Article 387 of the Criminal Code defines that offense as a crime of violence and the activities of the organizations in question are strictly peaceful. 19. On May 20, 1994, the two patrolmen who had been detained as suspects in the events of Colotenango were released on parole by court order, on their own recognizance. 4. In its request, the Commission describes the action: 20. The Commission received the original petition which gave rise to this case on November 4, 1993 and transmitted it to the Government in accordance with the standard procedures provided in the Convention. Prior to that, on September 9, 1993, the Commission had visited Colotenango and some of the neighboring villages and interviewed the victims, eyewitnesses, civil patrols and other individuals regarding the events that had occurred in August of that year. The denunciation that was transmitted to the Government sought provisional measures on behalf, particularly, of Messrs. MARCOS GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, NATIVIDAD GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, RAMIRO GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, JUAN GODÍNEZ-PÉREZ, MIGUEL GODÍNEZDOMINGO, ALBERTO GODÍNEZ, MARÍA GARCÍA -DOMINGO, and GONZALO GODÍNEZLÓPEZ, who had testified at the proceedings and had subsequently been subjected to persecution and threats. The private prosecutors in the case, MARÍA SALES-LÓPEZ and ALFONSO MORALES, had also been subjected to the same abuses. 21. In its reply of April 26 to the Commission regarding the denunciation, the Government described the progress made in the judicial proceedings against the