46 85(l) At the date of this judgment, more than sixteen years have elapsed since the facts occurred, and the remains of the 19 alleged victims have not been located and identified.45 85(m) The competent State authorities did not conduct any activities to seek for or identify the remains of the 19 alleged victims. However, Jorge Corzo Viviescas, father of the alleged victim, Reinaldo Corzo Vargas, reported on October 23, 1987, to the Eighth Criminal Trial Court of the San Gil Judicial District that “the body of Reinaldo Corzo Vargas had been found in the waters of the Guayabito River.” In response, the judge in charge merely asked the Police Inspectorate of Puerto Olaya, Puerto Araujo, Campo Capote and the Municipal Police of Berrío “if the removal of [Mr.] Corzo Vargas or anyone corresponding to his physical description had been verified” within their area, and obtained negative replies.46 Also, On July 14, 1989, the Seventeenth Criminal Trial Court of the Tunja Judicial District did not order any records to be made of the removal or identification of corpses, but merely requested those in charge of the Preliminary Investigation Section of the Technical Unit of the Judicial Police of Puerto Boyacá “to ask whether, in any office of that municipality, there were records of the removal of the corpses, autopsy results or official death certificates of the tradesmen who had disappeared,” obtaining negative replies from the different courts of the First Municipal Police Inspectorate of Puerto Boyacá and from the magistrate’s office of the Puerto Boyacá Circuit.47 86. Relationship between the “paramilitary” group and the security forces 86(a) In a number of significant cases, the investigations conducted by the Judiciary and the Attorney General’s office have demonstrated the active participation of members of the security forces in the so-called “paramilitary” groups. On different (helpful evidence presented by the State on May 26, 2004, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court -paragraph 68 of the application); and judgment delivered by the Cúcuta Regional Court on May 28, 1997 (evidence file presented by the State on April 18, 2002, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application - tome I, attachment 4, folio 1215). 45 Cf. testimony of Salomón Flórez Contreras given before the Court on April 21, 2004; testimony of Sandra Belinda Montero Fuentes given before the Court on April 21, 2004; judgment delivered by the Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of the San Gil Judicial District on October 19, 2001; and judgment delivered by the Criminal Court of the San Gil Specialized Circuit on March 23, 2001(evidence file presented by the State on April 18, 2002, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court paragraph 68 of the application - tome I, attachments 2 and 3, folios 1065, 1066 and 1100). 46 Cf. copy of the file before the prosecutor of the National Human Rights Unit in the case against Jairo Iván Galvis Brochero, Robinson Gutiérrez de la Cruz, Waldo Patiño García and others for the crimes of “extortive kidnapping, aggravated homicide,[…]” to the detriment of “Alvaro Lobo Pacheco and 18 other tradesmen,” file 087-DH (helpful evidence presented by the State on May 26, 2004, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application); and judgment delivered by the Superior Military Court on March 17, 1998 (evidence file presented by the State on April 18, 2002, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application - tome II, attachment 9, folio 1408). 47 Cf. copy of the file before the prosecutor of the National Human Rights Unit in the case against Jairo Iván Galvis Brochero, Robinson Gutiérrez de la Cruz, Waldo Patiño García and others for the crimes of “extortive kidnapping, aggravated homicide […]” to the detriment of “Alvaro Lobo Pacheco and 18 other tradesmen,” file 087-DH (helpful evidence presented by the State on May 26, 2004, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application).