note of the opinion of expert witness Marco Tulio Alvarez Bobadilla in the domestic criminal proceedings. According to this expert, documents found in the Historical Archive of the Police reveal that the notifications made regarding a permit granted to Mr. García in 1980 to organize a march (supra para. 64) exceeded what was normal, which “denotes more than the goal of ensuring security, the intention of controlling this type of activity,” because, for example, there is a handwritten annotation on one of the official notes, that “all units should take note.” 175 The expert concluded that “given Edgar Fernando García’s prominence, it was very logical to consider that the security forces were after him.” 176 In this regard, also in the Historical Archive of the National Police, an official letter was found from the Fourth Unit of the National Police to the Director of the National Police, in which, inter alia, it is reported that the CAVISA leaders had requested the construction of a hospital to “attend to those injured in armed confrontations with Government security forces in the urban area”; thus making a connection between the union and subversive groups (supra para. 64 and footnote 72). In addition, a file card appeared with information on Edgar Fernando García and, according to two experts in the domestic criminal proceedings, this was the way those considered to be subversives were registered. 177 120. The Court notes that during the armed conflict, there was a pattern of actions by the State aimed at capturing or eliminating the leaders of unions and student organizations because they opposed the State’s ideology. 178 As part of the State’s counterinsurgency policy, the forced disappearances were intended to dismantle the movements or organizations identified by the State as inclined towards “insurgency” and to instil fear in the population. 179 This policy is also reflected in the Diario Militar, where information was 175 Cf. Expert opinion of Marco Tulio Álvarez Bobadilla on the historical and political context of the forced disappearance of Edgar Fernando García provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folio 1552), and AHPN. Note received on March 21, 1980. GT PN 30-01 S004, No. 16262 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome II, annex A, folio 2626). See, also, AHPN. Note No. 358 of the Office of the Governor of the department of Guatemala. GT PN 30-01 S004, No. 16263, and Decision No. 105/Sbpp of March 24, 1980. GT PN 30-01 S004, No. 16267 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome II, annex A, folios 2627 and 2632). 176 Expert opinion of Marco Tulio Álvarez Bobadilla on the historical and political context of the forced disappearance of Edgar Fernando García provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folio 1552). The domestic criminal court accorded probative value to the conclusions of this expert opinion in its decision. Cf. Judgment of the Eighth Crime, Drug-trafficking and Environmental Offenses Court of October 28, 2010, C-01069-1997-00001 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome IV, annex C, folio 3823). 177 Cf. Expert opinion of Rember Aroldo Larios Tobar on the police structure in the case of Edgar Fernando García provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folios 1624 to 1630). The domestic criminal court accorded probative value to the conclusions of this expert opinion in its decision. Cf. Judgment of the Eighth Crime, Drug-trafficking and Environmental Offenses Court of October 28, 2010, C-01069-1997-00001 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome IV, annex C, folio 3814), and expert opinion of social psychologist Marina de Villagrán on the case of Edgar Fernando García provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folio 1659). 178 Cf. Expert opinion provided by Katharine Doyle on United States declassified documents related to the disappearance of Edgar Fernando García in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folios 2058 to 2060 and 2063); judgment of the Eighth Crime, Drug-trafficking and Environmental Offenses Court of October 28, 2010, C-01069-1997-00001 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome IV, annex C, folio 3784, 3785 and 3788); expert opinion of Marco Tulio Álvarez Bobadilla on the historical and political context of the forced disappearance of Edgar Fernando García provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folios 1543 to 1546); expert opinion of Fernando Arturo López Antillón on the effectiveness of habeas corpus during the internal armed conflict provided in the domestic criminal proceedings (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, tome I, folios 1973 and 1974), and video entitled “Aún guardamos la esperanza” of February 2009, supra, parts 1 and 2. 179 Cf. CEH, supra, volume II, chapter II, pp. 412 and 413, para. 2060, and Case of Molina Theissen v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of May 4, 2004. Series C No. 106, para. 40.1; expert opinion of Fernando Arturo López Antillón on the effectiveness of habeas corpus during the internal armed conflict provided in the domestic 42