by the Constitutional Court of Colombia as “a common, widespread, systematic, and invisible practice in the context of the Colombian armed conflict ”. 216 This context, in the Court's opinion, also constitutes an indicator of the predictability of the possible materialization of the threats, since Ms. Bedoya, in her capacity as a female journalist, was exposed to a specific situation of risk, of which the State should have been aware. 95. Therefore, the Court concludes that, in the instant case, the State was aware of the situation of real and imminent risk that Ms. Bedoya could be the target of an attack endangering her life or personal integrity. Furthermore, the Court notes that there is no record that the State evaluated what type of measures would be appropriate based on the specific risks and different forms of violence that Ms. Bedoya faced due to her profession and her gender, much less that it implemented specific measures aimed at providing her with adequate and effective protection, thus violating its duty to guarantee with regard to the rights to personal integrity and personal liberty. 96. Additionally, the Court observes that State agents knew ahead of time about Ms. Bedoya's visit to the La Modelo prison on May 25, 2000. This is made clear from the statement made by the guard at the prison entrance upon Ms. Bedoya’s arrival, when he indicated that he did not have a permit in her name but that "he knew about her visit,” 217 a visit that was made with the prior acquiescence of police officers in days prior as they assessed the other threats received by both Ms. Bedoya and her coworkers. Added to the above is the relevant fact that Ms. Bedoya was conducting investigations at the La Modelo Prison into arms trafficking, the purchase and sale of hostages, and other human rights violations that were being committed from the prison 218 with the complicity of State agents. 219 97. In addition, the Court highlights that the kidnapping was perpetrated at the gates of a prison, where, in days prior, a deadly clash took place between paramilitaries and members of common criminal groups. In this regard, it is striking that there was no police presence at the entrance to the prison at the time of Ms. Bedoya’s abduction, especially when it has been demonstrated that when the journalist and her coworkers arrived to the prison, a police patrol was stationed in the vicinity of the prison. 220 Added to the above are several testimonies that reinforce the thesis that the facts could not have occurred without the acquiescence or collaboration of the State. These include the statement of one of the perpetrators of the kidnapping, who said the police officers witnessed the kidnapping, “including the prison guard who attended her,” 221 and that the kidnapping had been 216 Cf. Constitutional Court of Colombia, Order 092 of 2008, of April 14, 2008 (evidence file, folio 434); also see ECOSOC. Commission on Human Rights, Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy, presented pursuant to resolution 2001/49 of the Commission on Human Rights. E/CN.4/2002/83/Add.3. March 11, 2002, para. 42. 217 Cf. Expansion of statement of Jineth Bedoya Lima, August 28, 2007 (evidence file, folio 405). Cf. Statement from Jineth Bedoya Lima given at the public hearing held on March 15, 22, and 23, 2021 within the framework of the 140th regular sessions. 218 219 Cf. Statement from Jineth Bedoya Lima given at the public hearing held on March 15, 22, and 23, 2021 within the framework of the 140th regular sessions, in which she stated the following: The reporting began at the end of 1997. Initially, I did it from the station where I worked—RCN Radio—and later, when I started working with El Espectador, we began to publish articles on the human rights violations committed by the armed groups inside the prison, unfortunately with the complicity of State agents, meaning members of the army and especially the police. More than 50 articles were published between 1999 and 2000. 220 In this regard, Ms. Bedoya reported that on the way to the house near the jail they passed "in front of a police patrol that at that time provided security at the jail" Cf. Statement from Jineth Bedoya Lima given at the public hearing held on March 15, 22, and 23 within the framework of the 140th regular sessions. Likewise, witness Jorge Enrique Cardona Álzate stated that there was a “police vehicle located kitty-corner to the entrance door to the prison.” Cfr. Sworn statement given by Jorge Enrique Cardona Álzate before the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, November 1, 2011 (evidence file, folio 23). 221 Cf. Investigation procedure rendered by Mr. Alejandro Cárdenas Orozco before the 49th Specialized Prosecutor's Office, of February 6, 2012 (evidence file, folio 820). 38