89. On January 23, 2001, the PGN suspended the investigation for the second time, due to lack of evidence of the participation of public officials in what occurred. It pointed out that “it is necessary to leave open the possibility that, if [the FGN] obtains proof or evidence,” the disciplinary investigation could be resumed. 96 C.2 The criminal investigation before the Prosecutor General’s Office 90. On May 21, 1993, Candelaria Vergara made a statement before the FGN, describing the circumstances of her husband’s disappearance and previous facts, and maintaining that she presumed that state security agencies were responsible. 97 91. In May 1993, investigators from the Prosecutor General’s Office (hereinafter “FGN”) visited the scene of the events, the “Forensic Medicine facilities” and “gave official written notice to units near Bogotá,” as well as “the [Judicial Investigation Section of the] DIJIN, the [Administrative Security Department and] the Armed Forces.”98 Later, in 1994, other proceedings of investigation were ordered.99 92. On April 12, 1996, the FGN took statements from two teachers from the Colegio John F. Kennedy, the contents of which have already been referred to and/or are mentioned later (supra para. 77 and infra para. 132).100 93. On June 5, 1996, the investigation was suspended, due to insufficient evidence regarding those responsible.101 On October 24, 1996, the suspension was overturned and, in that and subsequent decisions, the FGN ordered new proceedings of investigation.102 94. On April 15, 1997, R.B.N. (supra, para. 79) rendered a statement to the FGN.103 On June 13, 1997, the FGN visited Kennedy District town hall and on April 28, 1998, it examined the files PGN, Judicial decree ordering the case to be closed of January 23, 2001 (evidence file, Annex 43 to the Merits Report, folios 136 to 152). 97 FGN, statement rendered by Candelaria Vergara of May 21, 1993 (evidence file, Annex 17 to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 3495 to 3497). 98 Cf. FGN, Report on the investigation of May 31, 1993 (evidence file, files forwarded by the Commission, folios 3480 to 3482). 99 These included a communication sent to ASFADDES, requesting information related to Pedro Movilla; a communication sent to the Laboratory and Identification Division, asking for information about Mr. Movilla’s criminal and judicial records; an inspection at the National Civil Registry, to obtain Mr. Movilla’s fingerprint records; and an additional statement by Candelaria Vergara (cf., FGN: official letter to ASFADDES of February 17, 1994; communication to the Laboratory and Identification Division of March 29, 1994; judicial inspection at the National Civil Registry on April 7, 1994; and statement by Ms. Vergara of April 13, 1994 (evidence file, Annexes 45, 46, 81 and 3 to the Merits Report, folios 162, 164, 266, and 14 and 15)). 100 Cf. FGN: Statement by M.Y.M.C. of April 12, 1996 (evidence file, Annex 59 to the Merits Report, folios 195 to 197). Prosecutor General. Testimony of C.O.G. of April 12, 1996 (evidence file, Annex 60 to the Merits Report, folios 199 and 200). 101 Judgment of the Council of State - Subsection A of Section 3 of the Administrative Litigation Chamber, of June 23, 2011 (evidence file, Annex 85 to the Merits Report, folios 317 to 332). 102 Cf. FGN, National Human Rights Prosecutors Unit, Order of October 24, 1996 (evidence file, Annex 47 to the Merits Report, folio 166); and FGN, communication to the Technical Investigation Unit from the Human Rights Unit of the National Directorate of Prosecutors’ Offices, of April 8, 1997 (evidence file, Annex 47 to the Merits Report, files forwarded by the Commission, folio 168). The proceedings of investigation ordered included: an additional statement by Ms. Vergara; the ascertaining of the names of the pupils of the school who said they had seen the motorcyclists on May 13, 1993; the establishing of the relationship that existed between Pedro Movilla and P.J.P.D., and between Pedro Movilla and R.B.N.; an investigation to determine whether the loss of the latter’s weapon had been reported; as well as other measures designed to discover P.J.P.D.’s whereabouts, since it had not been possible to locate him since the incident occurred. 103 Cf. FGN, Statement by R.B.N. of April 15, 1997 (evidence file, Annex 76 to the Merits Report, folios 252 and 253). 96 25