2 c) With respect to the investigation of the denounced acts: the Office of the Public Prosecutor has investigated and punished the persons “who sponsor groups on the fringe of the law”; that it detained William Alberto Tulena, who is implicated in the acts of violence against the indigenous people of the Community; that Juan Bautista Casado Romero, former mayor of San Andrés de Sotavento, was summoned to testify and was heard in the inquiry of the investigation made into the homicide of four indigenous person from the municipality and that the Legal Representative of the Justice Department for Criminal Matters established three special agencies because of the homicide of various members of the Indigenous Community. The State also requested “that the present case continue to be processed regularly by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, since the premises for the application of Article 63(2) are not present, without prejudice, of course, to the commitment of the Colombian State to continue providing special attention to the various denounced situations and to the Zenú Indigenous Community in general.” 4. The January 13, 1999 observations of the Commission in which it stated the following: a) With respect to the measures of protection: that the petitioners reject the use of the “Security Schools” for the community; that the Commission for the Rights of Indigenous People of the Ministry of the Interior has stated that “the creation of Schools for Indigenous Security can in a given moment commit an offense against the ethnic and cultural identity of the indigenous peoples”; that, for that reason, it has recommended the definite suspension of this initiative in certain regions of the country, and that it is necessary to review this measure of protection; that it agrees with the State as to the necessity of trying those responsible for the violence suffered by the Community, but it disagrees that the State has not been able to make progress in the investigation due to the lack of cooperation on the part of the indigenous authorities; that the judiciary has the means to force witnesses to appear, and that the Commission calls upon the State to comply with its obligation under the Convention to seriously investigate those acts and to bring to trial and to punish those responsible. b) With respect to the difficulties and delays in the submission of the observations of the Commission: that the delays have been caused by the geographic situation of the Community, the delicate political-military context, and lack of access to the necessary information to evaluate the effectiveness of the measures; that the petitioners have expressed their concern with the difficulties that they experience in obtaining the information to make the reports of the Commission and have suggested the use of a joint work approach that allows for the interchange of information between the State, the representatives of the Community, and the Indigenous Organization of Colombia. c) Its concern with the effectiveness of the measures of protection implemented by the State: that these measures, along with the failure to try those responsible for the violence, do not offer an alternative of coexistence for the Community; that they regret the lack of communication with the Court and consider that the continuance of the measures is justified, although in the future they will be reevaluated, and that it will continue to call for the collaboration of the petitioners, the representatives of the Community, and the State in this task. 5. The January 20, 1999, writing of the Inter-American Commission, by means of which it submitted an expansion of its observations of January 13 of the same year, in which it stated: a) That on the days November 20 and 26, the State convoked meetings concerning the implementation of the provisional measures which were attended by officials of the Ministry of the Interior, the Presidential Council on Human Rights, the Office of the High Commissioner for Peace, the Public Defender, the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia, the indigenous community, and the petitioners; that in these meetings a member of the Community stated that around 150 persons had been assassinated in the Reservation as a consequence of the continuing situation of threats and harrassment; that the same member of the Community stated that two members had been taken to the Administrative “Office” of Security (DAS), where they hold meetings of paramilitaries, and they were told that “if care wasn’t taken the next indigenous chief could be a paramilitary”; that that member moved away from the area due to the threats he had