91. In parallel, starting in mid-1985, the justices of the Supreme Court of Justice began to receive death threats relating to the declaration of non-enforceability of the extradition treaty between Colombia and the United States of America. The members of the Council of State also received threats. 100 In response to these threats, an assessment was made of the physical security of the Palace of Justice, the origin of the threats was investigated, and the Government took over the personal protection of some of the justices. In addition, orders were given to reinforce the surveillance services of the Palace of Justice with “a contingent [composed of] an officer, a sergeant, and 20 agents,” which ceased on November 4, 1985. 101 On November 6, 1985, the security apparatus that had been ordered for the building owing to the threats was not present, and the Palace of Justice “only had basic surveillance consisting of no more than six employees of Cobasec, a private company.” 102 In addition, a few days earlier the metal detectors in the entries had been removed. 103 These facts are examined more thoroughly in Chapter XII of this Judgment in relation to the State’s alleged violation of its obligation to adopt the pertinent measures to prevent the taking of the Palace of Justice by the M-19. 92. Furthermore, according to the Truth Commission there were “two elements that characterize[d] the situation of the Judiciary at the end of the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s”: (i) the violence that affected the Judiciary, with an annual average of 25 judges and lawyers victims of attempts on their life, and (ii) “decisive rulings adopted by the Supreme Court of Justice and the Council of State that denoted the independence of the Judiciary in relation to the Executive and that, on several occasions, irritated different sectors in the country.” 104 B. The events of November 6 and 7, 1985 Gazette of June 17, 1986 (hereinafter “Report of the Special Investigative Court”) (evidence file, folios 30486 and 30487); Judgment of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Council of State in file 11377 of July 24, 1997 (evidence file, folio 527); National Police, Informe: toma “Palacio de Justicia” (evidence file, folio 31810), and Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folios 89, 93 and 103). 100 Cf. Report of the Special Investigative Court (evidence file, folios 30483 and 30484), and Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folios 94 and 98). 101 Cf. Report of the Special Investigative Court (evidence file, folios 30484, 30485 and 30490); Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folios 89, 94, 98, 101 and 104); Judgment of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Council of State of July 24, 1997 (evidence file, folios 526 and 527), and Judicial and Investigative Police Directorate, Estudio de Seguridad: Palacio de Justicia, October 1985 (evidence file, folio 31730). 102 Cf. Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folio 111); Judgment of the 51st Criminal Court of the Bogota Circuit of December 15, 2011 (evidence file, folio 20873); Testimony of January 13, 1986, provided by Julia Alba Navarrete Mosquera (evidence file, folio 14617), and Ana Carrigan, The Palace of Justice. A Colombian Tragedy, 1993 (evidence file, folio 28672). See also: request for surveillance services of October 17, 1985, signed by the Director General of the Rotating Fund of the Ministry of Justice and addressed to the company Cobasec (evidence file, folio 31637), and statements of Belisario Betancur Cuartas of April 10, 1986, March 2, 3 and 5, 1987, and January 17, 2006 (evidence file, folios 15132, 15139, 15153, 15167 and 15201). 103 Julia Alba Navarrete Mosquera, journalist of the news program “Alerta Bogotá” during the events of the taking of the Palace of Justice, met with Justice Reyes Echandía, who advised her informally that “they installed metal detectors for about eight days and then, three days before the taking of the Palace, they removed them.” Cf. Testimony of July 5, 2006, provided by Julia Alba Navarrete Mosquera to the Special Commission of the Attorney General’s office appointed to investigate the events of the Palace of Justice (hereinafter “the Special Commission”) (evidence file, folio 14771), and affidavit made on November 5, 2011, by Julia Alba Navarrete Mosquera (evidence file, folio 35903). 104 In particular, the Supreme Court of Justice at the time took certain decisions that limited the scope of the Executive’s powers in states of emergency and economic emergency. Furthermore, “the Council of State was also characterized by its judgments convicting the Colombian State for human rights violations committed by the security forces.” Cf. Report of the Truth Commission (evidence file, folios 67, 69, 70 and 73), and Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 163, para. 80. 35