24 September 1997, 85 before the National Public Prosecutor in August 1997, 86 and before the COPDH in September 1997 87 and October 1997, 88 with respect to the threats and acts of harassment against Mr. Vélez and his family. The State has also recognized that there is an investigation with the Public Prosecutor for the said threats and for the attempted kidnapping on October 6, 1997. 89 The State has not submitted copies of the case file of this investigation, despite the express request of the IACHR, 90 and therefore the Commission has not been in a position to examine the dates of the complaints that gave rise to the opening of the said investigation and must therefore adopt the corresponding presumptions. 91 The Commission thus finds that it has been established that, since September 1996 and until Mr. Vélez left the country in October 1997, the petitioners repeatedly informed various state authorities of the threats and acts of harassment they were suffering. 117. The Inter-American Court has established that States' obligations to adopt prevention and protection measures are conditioned on the awareness of a situation of real and imminent danger for a specific individual or group of individuals and on the reasonable possibilities of preventing or avoiding that danger. 92 In this respect the Commission observes that, in the present case, the situation of harassment and threats against Mr. Vélez and his family was known to the State of Colombia since September 11, 1996, when there was a complaint that four men, who claimed to belong to the Procurator General of the Nation's Office without providing identification, came to Mr. Vélez's home and questioned his wife about his schedule and activities. Threats and acts of harassment continued after this incident that were duly denounced by the petitioners. The Commission must therefore determine whether these complaints were sufficient to activate the obligation of State protection. 118. The Commission considers it relevant to mention in this respect the Colombian Constitutional Court itself, in interpreting "the right to personal security, as a right to receive state protection in the face of extraordinary risks which the individual should not have the legal duty to bear", has considered that the circumstances that allow reliance on this right "essentially depend on the case at hand, and must be evaluated as a whole, from a holistic perspective, to establish the nature, reach, strength and duration of the risks threatening each individual." 93 From a similar holistic perspective and applying the abovementioned criteria of the Inter-American System, the Commission considers that the complaints lodged before the competent authorities beginning on September 11, 1996, over the threats against the Vélez Román family ought to have immediately activated a risk analysis by the State and the adoption of the corresponding protective measures, 85 See Petitioners’ Brief received on October 4, 2006, Annex, Procurator General of the Nation, Human Rights Unit of the National Department of Special Investigations, October 10, 1997. 86 Petitioners’ Brief received on September 8, 2010, Annex 2, National Public Prosecutor's Office, Statement of Luis Gonzalo Vélez Restrepo, August 27, 1997. 87 See Petitioners’ Brief received on September 8, 2010, Annex 5, Council for Human Rights of the Presidency of the Republic, Letter to Gustavo Gallon in sua sponte reply of September 29, 1997, October 14, 1997. 88 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, Annex 35, Letter of Luis Manuel Lasso Lozano, Case Coordinator, Office of the Presidential Advisor for Human Rights, to Raúl Hernández, July 6, 1998. 89 State’s brief received on August 4, 2009, p. 47. 90 Letter of the IACHR to the State of Colombia, Case 12.658, April 30, 2010. 91 I/A Court H.R., Case of González et al. (“Campo Algodonero”) v Mexico, Decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, January 19, 2009, para. 59. s 92 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre v Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para.123. See also, IACHR, Application before the Inter-American Court in the case Campo Algodonero (Cases 12.496, 12.497 and 12.498) against the United States Mexicans, November 4, 2007, para.159; Report No. 24/98, Case 11.287, João Canuto de Oliveira, Brazil, April 7, 1998, para.53. 93 Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgment T-1254/08, Case File T-1900262, Judge Rapporteur Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa, December 12, 2008, p. 17.