65 Comuna 13’s Nuevo Neighborhood, and that in this process they lost their house and belongings, being forced to move elsewhere to find safety.294 The State of Colombia has not disputed before the Commission that the threats that lead Ms. Myriam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa and Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas and their family members to vacate their homes and to forcibly displace were perpetrated by paramilitary groups. 227. The threats and their aftermath reported by Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas and Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa are also consistent with the pronouncements of the IACHR, the Ombudsman’s Office in Colombia, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and other national organizations about the consolidation of the paramilitary presence in Comuna 13 by 2002, and the perpetration by these groups of acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation against those who did not support their project to control the zone.295 The IACHR has also verified that these factors generated the intra-urban displacement of many families, forced to abandon their homes, encouraging what the paramilitary groups qualify as the “reign of silence”.296 These actions have also been aggravated by the inaction from the State towards the targeting and stigmatization of the work of these organizations and their members; their tolerance and acquiescence of the paramilitary presence in Comuna 13; and the impunity of the vast majority of these events. 228. In this sense, the IACHR considers proven (paragraphs 147-154 above) that the events reported by Miryam Eugenia Rúa Figueroa and Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas occurred in a context of armed conflict in the Comuna 13 well-known by the Colombian state, characterized by clashes between the illegal armed groups and the public forced for several decades.297 This context has been intensified by military operations executed by the State in the zone during 2002, and the solidification of the paramilitary presence after these operations.298 229. Based on these proven facts, the Commission is prompted to make the following legal conclusions. Firstly, the IACHR finds that the State had a heightened duty of protection with regard to the civilian population of Comuna 13, in light of the context of armed conflict in the area, which was public knowledge; the implementation by the State of several consecutive military operations during 2002; and the increase in the paramilitary presence in the zone after these operations. These duties emanate from its obligations contracted under international human rights law, described above in paragraphs 216-222. The State itself has recognized the context of insecurity in Comuna 13 as 294 Annex 4. File Number 289, Secretariat for the Environment (SIMPAD), July 10, 2002. 295 IACHR, Press Release, No. 40/02, IACHR Concerned over Situation in Comuna 13 in the City of Medellin, Colombia. October 18, 2002; IACHR, Press Release No. 15/03, Rapporteur concludes working visit to the Republic of Colombia, June 27, 2003; United Nations, Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Human Rights Situation in Colombia, Annual Report 2002, February 24, 2003; Annex 35. Risk Report N˚ 016-10, Office of the Ombudsman of Colombia; Annex 36. Risk Report N˚ 009-07, Office of the Ombudsman of Colombia; Audio, IACHR, Thematic Hearing, “Human Rights th Situation in the Region of Antioquia and in Comuna 13 of Medellín, Colombia,” October 16, 2012, 116 period of sessions. 296 IACHR, Report on the Process of Demobilization in Colombia, OEA/Ser.L/II.120 Doc. 60, December 13, 2004, par. 82. 297 IACHR, Press Release No. 15/03, IACHR Rapporteur concludes working visit to the Republic of Colombia, June 27, 2003; IACHR, Report on the Process of Demobilization in Colombia, OEA/Ser.L/II.120 Doc. 60, December 13, 2004, par. 82. 298 IACHR, Press Release No. 15/03, IACHR Rapporteur concludes working visit to the Republic of Colombia, June 27, 2003; IACHR, Report on the Process of Demobilization in Colombia, OEA/Ser.L/II.120 Doc. 60, December 13, 2004, par. 82.