B. Domestic proceedings relating to the disappearance of Víctor Manuel Isaza Uribe 63. The Commission lacks complete information regarding domestic proceedings relating to the facts of this case. Accordingly, the Commission will conduct a determination of the facts regarding domestic proceedings based on information provided by the parties and contained in the file. 1. Criminal investigation 64. The State submitted a breakdown of the main actions taken in the course of the criminal investigations, as follows: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) On November 19, 1987, Criminal Investigation Court 64 in Puerto Nare ordered the initiation of preliminary inquiries.. Subsequently - no date is cited - the prosecution ordered the suspension of the investigation on the grounds that there was insufficient cause to either initiate pre-trial proceedings or issue a recusal (proferir resolución inhibitoria). The investigation was re-opened on February 28, 1995 by the Anti-kidnapping Unit in Puerto Berrio, and the corresponding order issued on September 8, 1995. A warrant for the arrest of four individuals was issued on September 11, 1995 and in that same month the Medellín Regional Prosecutor's Office refrained from issuing a restraining order for lack of evidence of liability. The investigation was closed on March 19, 1996, and on April 30 of the same year an order was issued to terminate the investigation into the four individuals, on the grounds that "none of the witnesses [...] directly identify those investigated as the persons who took away the prisoners from the Puerto Nare jail [...]." The opening of preliminary investigations was formally announced on July 15, 1996 marking a resumption of investigations into the facts. To that end, an order was issued to examine several pieces of evidence. On August 25, 1997, the Medellín Regional Prosecutor's Office ordered a suspension of the investigation, given that the examination of the evidence had not yielded results likely to shed light on the facts. In 2010, an order was issued to re-open the investigation. On August 24, 2011, the office in charge of the investigation ordered that a hearing be granted to those applying for the benefits of Law 975 of 2005 on Justice and Peace, who had committed crimes in Magdalena Medio. The State reported that none of the applicants for benefits had referred to or confessed to the facts of this case nor were said facts registered in the Justice and Peace Information System (SIJYP) of the Attorney General's Office.19 65. Based on the actions listed above and information provided by the Parties, the Commission notes that the investigation was suspended and provisionally archived in 1997 and reactivated in 2010, and is currently at the preliminary state before the 8th Specialized Prosecutor’s Office in Medellín. 2. Disciplinary proceedings 66. On January 11, 1989, Mrs. Carmenza Vélez, wife of Mr. Víctor Manuel Isaza Uribe, filed a complaint regarding the detention and subsequent disappearance of her husband with the Office of the State Attorney for Human Rights. Mrs. Vélez amplified her complaint on July 22 of that year, when she denounced the lack of progress in the criminal investigation; specifically, she alleged that on July 17, 1989 she had gone to Criminal Investigation Court 64 to inquire about the investigation and had been told that it had been archived because nobody wanted to testify, that unfortunately nobody was speaking out. In that amplification of her complaint, Mrs. Vélez wrote that "it is not possible for them not to do anything knowing that he was taken from the prison by armed men, some in uniform and others dressed in civilian clothes" and "people 19 Appendix. State’s communication of April 22, 2013.