Dignidad” (hereinafter “CAVIDA”) [Self-determination, Life and Dignity Community].245 After remaining for almost three years in the Turbo sports arena and in the El Cacique hacienda Bahía Cupica (Chocó), they began the process of returning to their territory, following agreements between the national Government and the community, and monitored by a Joint Verification Commission. Another group of the displaced population chose to settle definitively in the municipality to which they had been displaced. 246 Owing to the situation of insecurity and scarcities, they asked the Government to provide adequate safety and socio-economic conditions for their return.247 124. Agreements were therefore signed with the Colombian Government. 248 Some of the agreements made by the Government, the communities and the Joint Verification Commission included the construction of housing, a production project, the “unclogging” of the navigable waterways and the permanent presence of the Ombudsman’s Office as part of the comprehensive protection scheme.249 In addition, on December 13, 1999, the “Return Agreement between the Communities displaced from the Cacarica river basin provisionally settled in Turbo, Bocas de Atrato and Bahía, and the national Government” was signed, which included the components that the Government had to carry out for the definitive return of the communities.250 245 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office. Press communiqué No. 869, of August 21, 2003 (evidence file, folio 51403). The objectives of these communities: not to participate either directly or indirectly in the armed conflict; not to bear arms; not the provide help of any type to those taking part in the conflict; to draw up their own regulations and abide by them; to bear the distinctive signs of the community responsibly; to commit to a political and negotiated settlement of the armed conflict; to enhance community work, and to defend their national identity and their territory. In order to put these objectives into practice, the communities requested the participants in the conflict: (a) to respect the areas where they live and work; (b) to respect their freedom of movement; (c) to remove the restriction on foodstuffs; (ch) to avoid political campaigning within the community and, consequently, not to recruit or pressure its members; (d) to respect their choice and their non-violent action; (e) to respect their civil rights and international humanitarian law; (f) to respect their principles and autonomy; (g) to abstain from taking reprisals against the community for those who join armed groups and, also, to denounce the facts to the Verification Commission. Ombudsman’s Office. Decision No. 025 of the Ombudsman on the massive human rights violations and forced displacement in the Bajo Atrato region of Chocó, October 2002, point C, Nos. 23 to 26. Constitutional Court. T-955 of October 17, 2003 (evidence file, folios 137 and 138). See also, Somos Tierra de Esta Tierra. Memorias de una Resistencia Civil. CAVIDA (evidence file, folio 301 and ff.). 246 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office. Press communiqué No. 869, of August 21, 2003 (evidence file, folio 51403); Constitutional Court. Judgment T-955 of October 17, 2003 (evidence file, folio 139 and 140). See also: The Ombudsman’s Office. Decision No. 025 of the Ombudsman on the massive human rights violations and forced displacement in the Bajo Atrato region of Chocó, October 2002, para. 27 (evidence file, folio 233). 247 Cf. Constitutional Court. Judgment T-955 of October 17, 2003 (evidence file, folio 135). See also: Ombudsman’s Office. Decision No. 025 of the Ombudsman on the massive human rights violations and forced displacement in the Bajo Atrato region of Chocó, October 2002, para. 27 (evidence file, folio 233): “The conditions consisted in the construction of two new settlements (Esperanza en Dios and Nueva Vida), the award of collective title to the lands, the State’s protection without weapons, community development and non-pecuniary reparation.” See also: Affidavits of January 21, 2013 of John Jairo Mena Palacio (evidence file, folios 14985 and 14986); Henry Anguro Martínez (evidence file, folio 15075) and Marcos Fidel Velásquez (evidence file, folios 14957 to 14959). 248 Cf. Constitutional Court. Judgment T-955 of October 17, 2003 (evidence file, folio 139); for example, the “Return Agreement between the Communities displaced from the Cacarica river basin provisionally settled in Turbo, Bocas de Atrato and Bahía, and the national Government” was signed on December 13, 1999. Similarly, letter of January 7, 1999, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the Commission (evidence file, folio 3913). 249 Cf. Ombudsman’s Office. Press communiqué No. 869 of August 21, 2003 (evidence file, folio 51403). According to the Ombudsman’s Office, “[m]ost of these project have been executed with resources from the National Budget, supervised by the Social Solidarity Network, the Ministry of Transportation, and the Banco Agrario, among others”; See also, Somos Tierra de Esta Tierra. Memorias de una Resistencia Civil. CAVIDA (evidence file, folio 301 and ff.). 250 These components were: humanitarian assistance until the families could ensure their subsistence, documentation, construction of 418 houses, formal handing over of the decision awarding collective title to the territory to the community in Turbo on December 15, 2000, implementation of measures of protection, and dragging and chaneling of the navigable waterways of Perancho and Peranchito. Cf. Return Agreement between the Communities displaced from the Cacarica river basin provisionally settled in Turbo, Bocas de Atrato and Bahía, and the national Government (evidence file, folios 1632 to 1658); Colombian Constitutional Court, Judgment T-955 of October 17, 2003 (evidence file, folio 139). 51