27 arrived and violently searched the whole sector. Subsequently, and based on accounts provided by my neighbors, I found out that my house was being occupied by members of this group, who publically claimed “that they already knew that the chair of Community Action lived in that house.” As a result of the events recounted above, I went to the Office of Human Rights of the Office of the Inspector General of the Department, in order to provide a statement of forced displacement. I also submitted to this entity an application for registration in the SUR and reported the looting of my home and the displacement of which I am a victim to the Sectional 34 Office of the Public Prosecutor of Medellin. 121. This request to reconsider her case was denied once again by the Social Solidarity Network (Acción Social) on October 10, 2006.35 On April 16, 2007, humanitarian aid was awarded to Mrs. Miryam Rua Figueroa by Acción Social, as follow-up to the admissibility report of the IACHR, approved on February 27, 2007, in the amount of $618,000 Colombian pesos.36 122. Ms. Rua brought a tutela suit (a special appeal for constitutional protection) on August 6, 2010 against the Presidential Agency for the Social Solidarity Network (Acción Social), recounting several different procedures that she had followed at said entity and the contradictory nature of the responses.37 On August 24, 2010, the 17th Circuit Court for Civil Matters of Medellin granted leave to hear the constitutional protection suit filed by Mrs. Miryam Rúa Figueroa, citing the ambiguous nature of the communications received by Mrs. Rúa from the Social Solidarity Agency, the consequence of which was “that the plaintiff was unable to find out what her actual status was according to Social Solidarity, as to aid and benefits she can gain access to if she qualifies and is included in the Single Registry of the Displaced Population (“RUPD”),” and the Court ordered the Office of Social Solidarity Network in Antioquia to issue a clear response to Ms. Rúa regarding being included in the RUPD.38 On September 7, 2010, Ms. Rúa received a communication from the Social Solidarity Network Office confirming that she was not included in the RUPD.39 123. Mrs. Miryam Eugenia Rúa has been unable to resume her duties as leader because, as a result of the displacement, she must work to support her daughters, and she is in fear of the accusations 34 Annex 6. Communication of Miryam Rua Figueroa addressed to Social Solidarity Network, Request for registry in the SUR, October 2, 2006. Annex 4. Observation of the Petitioners in reference to the Matter of Miryam Eugenia Rua Figueroa et al – Case 12.595, dated May 3, 2012. 35 Annex 7. Communication of Social Solidarity Network. October 10, 2006. Annexes to Observations of the petitioners in reference to the matter of Miryam Eugenia Rua Figueroa – Comuna 13 – dated March 25, 2010. 36 Ministry of Foreign Relations, Directorate of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, Observations on the Matter of Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa et al, Case 12.595, April 17, 2007; Presidential Agency for Social Solidarity; Granting of Humanitarian Aid to Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa, April 15, 2007; and Assertion of the Right of Petition, David Medina Hernandez, October 26, 2007. Annex 4. Communication of the Petitioners in reference to the matter of Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa et al, - Case 12.595, dated May 3, 2012. 37 Annex 10. Suit for Constitutional Relief (tutela) brought by Miryam Eugenia Rua Figueroa against the Presidential Agency for Social Solidarity, August 6, 2010 before the Circuit Court Judge for Civil Matters (Duty Judge), Medellin. Annex 4. Communication of the Petitioners in the matter of Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa et al – Case 12.595, dated May 3, 2012. 38 Annex 11. Suit for Constitutional Relief (tutela), Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa, Office for Social Solidarity, Judgment th No. 305, August 24, 2010, 17 Circuit Court for Civil Matters of Medellin. 39 Annex 12. Communication of the Agency for Social Solidarity, September 7, 2010. Annex 4. Observations of the Petitioners in reference to the matter of Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa et al – Case 12.595, dated May 3, 2012.