41 168. On February 9, 2017, the State reported in its final version of the answering brief that, within the framework of the “Justice and Peace” jurisdiction, actions continue to be taken to “clarify” the “responsibility of paramilitary groups related to the facts of this case.” Prosecutor 34 asserted that the facts of this case will be presented in an indictment hearing on attacks on left-wing groups, without the Court having further information on the progress of the process.166 VIII MERITS 169. Prior to examining the merits, the Court recalls that this case is related to the attack on Noel Emiro Omeara Carrascal on January 28, 1994 and his subsequent death; the forced disappearance and execution of Manuel Guillermo Omeara Miraval, son of the former, from August 27 to September 23, 1994; and the attack and subsequent death of Héctor Álvarez Sánchez, father-in-law of the latter, on October 21, 1994. Based on the facts, the Commission argued that there are sufficient elements to conclude that there was collaboration between state agents and persons belonging to a paramilitary group that operated in the area so that the attack on Mr. Omeara Carrascal could take place, as well as the forced disappearance and subsequent execution of his son Omeara Miraval. He also alleged that what happened to the latter between his disappearance and execution reached the level of torture. In addition, it was argued that the attack suffered by Mr. Álvarez Sánchez and his subsequent death was due to the fact that the State did not provide him with the protection he required, allowing the attack to occur. All the events that occurred caused his next of kin suffering due to the facts themselves, as well as due to the lack of clarification and the constant fear and anguish due to renewed retaliation in the search for justice and incidences of threats and intimidation. Some family members, including three minors, moved because of the risk they faced due to the attacks and death of their loved ones. Finally, the Commission established a lack of due diligence to investigate the facts. 170. In this chapter, the Court will examine the merits of the case, taking into account the aforementioned partial acknowledgment of State responsibility in order to establish the scope of Colombia's international responsibility for the alleged violations regarding the aspects in which the dispute is ongoing, as follows: (1) the rights to life and humane treatment established in Articles 4(1) and 5(1) of the Convention, with respect to Mr. Álvarez Sánchez; (2) the right to humane treatment, established in Article 5(2) of the American Convention, regarding Mr. Omeara Miraval; (3) the judicial guarantees to a fair trial and judicial protection provided for in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the Convention with respect to some aspects related to the investigations of the events that occurred to Messrs. Omeara Carrascal, Omeara Miraval and Álvarez Sánchez, and (4) the rights of movement and residence and protection of privacy established in Articles 22(1) and 11(2)of the Convention, with respect to some family members of Omeara Carrascal, Omeara Miraval and Álvarez Sánchez. 166 Statement of Iván Augusto Gómez Celis, supra.