57 it deemed that the substantive prerequisites were lacking. Likewise, it requested a modification of the provisional legal definition with regard to José Miller Ureña Díaz and Juan Carlos Gamarra Polo, as well as preclusion of the investigation in favor of Jorge Luis Almeira Quiroz, Helio Ernesto Buitrago León, and Juan Manuel Ortiz Matamoros.85 96.84 On April 13, 1999 the Attorney General’s Office established that Lieutenant Colonel Lino Hernando Sánchez Prado, Commander of the 2d Mobile Brigade of the National Army, collaborated directly with the paramilitary group that acted in Mapiripán. Therefore, it decided: […] To order preventive detention, without the right to release from prison, against Lieutenant Colonel of the National Army Lino Hernando Sánchez Prado […] for his liability as an active participant in a conspiracy to commit a crime Art. 186 of the C.C., paragraph 3 and for being remiss regarding the crimes of aggravated homicide, aggravated kidnapping and terrorism […] […] The respective arrest warrant will be forwarded to the Commander of the military garrison where officer Sánchez Prado is to be found. […] To forbid Lieutenant Colonel Lino Hernando Sánchez Prado from leaving the country, 86 in accordance with Article 395 of the Criminal Procedures Code […] 96.85 On April 20, 1999 the Attorney General’s Office addressed the Regional Public Prosecutor in charge of the case and desisted from the appeal filed against the March 30, 1999 ruling that defined the legal situation of Lieutenant Colonel Hernán Orozco Castro (supra para. 96.80) since, in its opinion, the remiss conduct of said officer, regarding the facts that took place in Mapiripán, was under the jurisdiction of military criminal venue, which hindered continuation with procedural unity. Therefore, the Attorney General’s Office asked the Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office to generate a clash of jurisdiction. In this regard, it deemed that: The facts narrated show that LC OROZCO CASTRO did not carry out his constitutional and legal functions of protecting the lives, honor and property of the persons residing in Colombia (Art. 2 para. 2 Pol. Const.); that he did not carry out acts that were required by his functions, as an active member of the Military Forces and acting Commander of the Joaquín París Battalion […].87 96.86 On May 10, 1999 the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the National Human Rights Unit decided not to reconsider any of the points of the April 7, 1999 ruling (supra para. 96.82). However, it granted the subsidiary appeal against that same decision in the effect of staying execution of the ruling (supra para. 96.83), and this was ratified by that same instance in the May 24, 1999 order and forwarded to the Deputy Public Prosecutor’s Office before the Tribunal Nacional, for its review.88 85 See the September 24, 1999 ruling by the Deputy Prosecutor’s Office before the High Court of the Court Circuit of Santafé de Bogotá (file with appendixes to the brief containing pleadings and motions, appendix 25, pages 3149, 3152, 3153 and 3155). 86 See April 13, 1999 ruling by the Office of the Attorney General (file with appendixes to the application, appendix 38, pages 535, 541 and 551), and statement by Hernán Orozco Castro, rendered before the Office of the Attorney General on March 25, 1999 (file with appendixes to the brief containing pleadings and motions, appendix 13, pages 3053, 3060 and 3069). 87 See the August 18, 1999 ruling by the High Council of the Judiciary (file with appendixes to the application, appendix 54, page 817). 88 See May 10, 1999 ruling by the Prosecutor’s Office of the National Human Rights Unit (file with appendixes to the application, appendix 36, pages 526 and 527), and August 18, 1999 ruling by the High Council of the Judiciary (file with appendixes to the application, appendix 54, page 837).