55. The Commission has no information at its disposal showing that the State Attorney's office followed up on the situation of threats and fear described in its resolution. 56. In the same resolution and on the matter of the perpetrators possibly being members of the FARC, the State Attorney's Office for the Defense of Human Rights had the following to say: The refusal by some of those who gave statements to accept any possibility that members of the FARC might be responsible for the abduction of Isaza and his fellow inmates was due to the fact that, according to them, at that time guerrilla groups were not operating in that zone. Nevertheless, it is worth pointing out that DAS and Army Intelligence reports do not corroborate that claim. It is also generally accepted that paramilitary groups were present, and they would not have been there unless guerrilla groups were also in the area. Here, it is necessary to stress that there is no evidence, either, that the so-called "paramilitary" perpetrated the disappearance of ISAZA.14 57. The petitioners remitted a copy of statements taken by the Departmental State Attorney's Office at the behest of the State Attorney's Office for the Defense of Human Rights. Asked about the acts of violence, the disappearance of Mr. Isaza, and the leaflets purportedly left by the Ninth Front of the FARC, Mr. Alirio Antonio Sierra Pérez declared: In 1986, I was the President of SUTIMAC [...] 1987 was all about persecution, threats, disappearances and murders of my fellow trade unionists and activities., all of it sponsored by the Army, which was supporting the paramilitary groups in the region [...]. About 17 of us left the region in1987, and more followed suit in 1988. Our fellow worker Víctor Isaza had been detained [...] At the time, Army Cost Guard Unit 122 was in Puerto Nare, about 50 meters from the prison {...]. Likewise, the police station is just three blocks away from the prison, and, what is more, the members of the MAS were on patrol in the town. So not even the local population can see how our fellow workers could have disappeared [..] because not a single shot was fired or anything. The way I see it, that was a paramilitary operation. I used to have one of their leaflets, but I can pretty well assure you that at that time and at that every moment there was no guerrilla presence in the region and I don't see how, surrounded by the army, police, and paramilitary, a guerrilla group could enter the prison to rescue four of their pals and nobody sees anything. Personally, I believe that that leaflet was produced by the paramilitary themselves with a view to creating further confusion in the region.15 58. Mr. Francisco Javier Gómez testified as follows: I was a resident and Colcarburo worker in La Sierra, Puerto Nare, from 1973 until 1988. For 12 years I was a trade union leader at Cocarburo and in that capacity it strikes me that the acts of violence at that time basically had to do with vested economic interests [...]. Early in 1986, one of the great workers' leaders at Cementos Nare was murdered after defending workers' interests acquired in over 30 years of struggle. Many workers at Cementos Nare 14 Appendix. Decision of the Office of teh State Attorney for the Defense of Human Rights, October 20, 1992. Appendix to the comments of the petitioners dated August 4, 1995. 15 Appendix. Statement by Mr. Alirio Antonio Sierra Pérez to the Departmental State Attorney's Office in Medellín, on January 30, 1992. Appended to the comments of the petitioners received on March 23, 1992.