34 138. On November 13, 2002, Mrs. Mosquera, Mrs. Naranjo and Mrs. Yarce were interrogated.89 In the course of their interrogation, they stated that at the time of their arrest they were not told the reason why; that the accusations made against them were false, and that they had been threatened because of their leadership work within the Community Action Board.90 They also noted clashes that they had had with Mr. Diomer Castañeda, who took steps to keep them from being able to participate as candidates in the elections for the Community Action Board.91 139. In the preliminary statement given by Mrs. Mery Naranjo, she, too, makes reference to an earlier meeting they had with the Secretary of Municipal Government, in which they reported human rights violations: ….Last Friday the Secretary of Municipal Government summoned the community leaders to a meeting at the Monsignor Perdomo school, which is in the San Javier neighborhood. At the meeting, I spoke about the fear within the community; I said that although the security forces are everywhere, people were disappearing and turning up dead, killed with machetes and knives. I said that it’s fine for the security forces to be there, as we can all sleep better at night. But these 92 anomalies have to be investigated. 140. During the process, Ms. Maria Janneth Estrada Serna93 went to the Prosecutor’s Office and made a statement on November 18, 2002. Speaking as vice chair of the Community Action Board, she, too, alluded to the disputes between members of the Community Action Board and Mr. Diomer Castañeda.94 141. On November 21, 2002, the Prosecutor in investigation No. 631609 decided not to order any custodial measure for Ms. Yarce, Ms. Naranjo and Ms. Mosquera, and ordered their immediate release instead.95 In that decision, the Prosecutor made reference to the “complete lack of evidence” in Prosecutorial Unit Assigned to the Medellín Criminal Circuit Court Judges, dated November 21, 2002. Annex to the Colombian State’s note DH. GOI No. 12442-0552 of March 15, 2007, and to the petitioners’ communication in the matter of Mery Naranjo et al. – Comuna 13, March 25, 2010; Annex 36. Statement that Darío de Jesús Castaño Toro made to the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation-Rapid Response Unit – Sectional Prosecution 12. Annex to the petitioners’ communication in the matter of Mery Naranjo et al. – Comuna 13, March 25, 2010. 89 Annex 37. Preliminary questioning of Mrs. Mery del Socorro Naranjo Jiménez, November 13, 2002, Attachment to the original petition in the matter of Socorro Mosquera Londoño and Mery Naranjo Jiménez – Comuna 13 – March 7, 2005. 90 Annex 37. Preliminary questioning of Mrs. Mery del Socorro Naranjo Jiménez, November 13, 2002; Annex 38. Preliminary questioning of Mrs. Ana Teresa Yarce by the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, November 13, 2002. Annex to the petitioners’ communication in the matter of Miryam Eugenia Rua Figueroa et al. – Comuna 13, November 22 and 25, 2011; Annex 39. Preliminary questioning of Mrs. Maria del Socorro Mosquera Londoño, November 14, 2002. Annex to the original petition in the matter of Socorro Mosquera Londoño and Mery Naranjo Jiménez – Comuna 13 – March 7, 2005. 91 Annex 38. Preliminary statement of Mrs. Ana Teresa Yarce to the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, November 13, 2002. 92 Annex 37. Preliminary questioning of Mrs. Mery del Socorro Naranjo Jiménez, November 13, 2002. 93 Annex 40. Sworn statement of Janneth Estrada Serna dated November 18, 2002. Attachment to the original petition in reference to the matter of Socorro Mosquera Londoño and Mery Naranjo Jiménez – Comuna 13 – March 7, 2005. 94 95 Annex 40. Sworn statement of Janneth Estrada Serna dated November 18, 2002. Annex 41. Copy of the resolution issued by the Prosecutorial Unit Assigned to the Criminal Court Judges of the Medellín Specialized Circuit, dated November 21, 2002.