136 in Colombia, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has documented the cases of collaboration between the security forces and the paramilitary, which have constituted a major obstacle to respect for human rights in Colombia, in the opinion of the High Commissioner. In her reports, the High Commissioner constantly refers to the State’s impunity vis-à-vis violations by the paramilitary and connivance between these groups and the security forces.272 240. In brief, partial impunity and ineffectiveness of the criminal proceeding in this case reveal two aspects: first, the vast majority of those responsible have not been formally joined to the investigations, or they have not been identified or prosecuted –if we take into account that the State acknowledged that more than 100 individuals participated in the massacre and that the Court has established its responsibility because the massacre could not have been committed without knowledge, toleration and collaboration by the highest commanders of the Colombian Army in the areas where the facts took place. Secondly, impunity is reflected in the trial and conviction in absentia of the paramilitary who, while they hold high positions in the structures of the AUC, as in the case of Carlos Castaño Gil, their leader, they have benefited from the way the judicial system has acted, convicting them but without executing the punishment. In this regard, the Court notes the fact communicated by the State, when it sent information requested as evidence to facilitate adjudication, that on August 3d of this year an order was issued to formally join Salvatore Mancuso Gómez to the proceeding, but the arrest warrant against him was suspended “due to his role as representative of the Autodefensas Unidas of Colombia in the peace process undertaken by the Government with said organization.” * * * 241. In conclusion, the Court deems that the violations found regarding the victims’ rights to personal liberty, to humane treatment and to life (supra para. 139), are aggravated as a consequence of non-fulfillment of the duty to provide protection and of the duty to investigate the facts, as a consequence of the lack of effective judicial mechanisms to this end and to punish all those responsible for the Mapiripán Massacre. Therefore, the State has violated Articles 8(1) and 25 of the Convention, in combination with Article 1(1) of that same treaty, to the detriment of the next of kin of the victims of the instant case. on March 7, 2005, and sworn statement rendered by expert witness Robin Kirk on February 15, 2005 (file with statements rendered before a notary public, appendix 15, page 4631). 272 See Report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Colombia in 1999, E/CN.4/2000/11, March 9, 2000, paras. 110 and 111; Report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Colombia in the year 2000, E/CN.4/2001/15, March 20, 2001, para. 131-136, 254 [“There is still much concern about persisting ties between public employees and members of the paramilitary organizations, and lack of punishment.”]; Report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Colombia in 2001, E/CN.4/2002/17, February 28, 2002, para. 202, 211 and 365 [“Ultimately, the impunity that cloaks those responsible for paramilitary actions, through action or omission, and the limited effectiveness of State mechanisms to combat them explain to a large extent the strengthening of those groups.”], and Report by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Colombia in the year 2002, E/CN.4/2003/13, February 24, 2003, para. 34, 74, 75-77 [“The fact that the vast majority of cases remain in a situation of impunity, without establishing the criminal liability of public employees for their links with paramilitary groups and actions, is one of the most questionable aspects of the commitment to combat said links.”]