48 208. On May 27, 1997, the President of the Republic responded negatively to the whole 56 remedies maintaining: (i) that the aim of the tutela action is not that of protecting collective rights; (ii) that the Security Forces do not tolerate or support the presence of illegal armed groups; and (iii) that the 220 Government had created a Committee to deal with the displaced. 209. Of the 56 tutelas, 12 were decided favorably for the petitioners. The dismissals were justified on the basis that: (i) the tutela is not a mechanism to protect collective rights; (ii) the lack of territorial jurisdiction since the events had occurred outside the range of jurisdiction, this being the most repeated argument; (iii) that the right to peace and the application international treaties could not be protected by way of a tutela, due to its exceptional character; (iv) that there had been no evidence of a risk to the right to life, food and work; and (v) that the displacement of the civilian population in Colombia 221 was due to the internecine struggle that for years has spawned illegal groups. 210. The favorable decisions established that the displaced "should be provided with adequate conditions of security, such as asserted by Dr. Ernesto Samper Pizano, President of the 222 Republic of Colombia, in the response referred to in the arguments”. 211. A complaint was filed in court against the President of the Republic for non compliance, 223 contempt of court and fraud of a judicial resolution. This complaint was rejected on September 10, 1997, considering that the Government was indeed complying with the order and reference was made to 224 instructions for the Armed Forces, who should protect the displaced as they returned. 212. On December 13, 1999, the Vice-Presidency of the Republic reached a series of agreements with the displaced communities in the Cacarica basin; and undertook to request from the investigating bodies and the judicial branch periodic reports on the state of the investigations, the 225 perpetrators of the forced displacement and the murders. C. Determinations of Law 1. Prior Considerations 213. In Admissibility Report No. 86/06, the Commission noted that "collective claims alleging violations of the rights of particularly vulnerable groups, which include communities of African descent, warrant special treatment. In the case under examination, the individual identification of the victims vis-àvis the Commission's competence to examine the merits of the claim must acknowledge the victims' status as Afro-descendants, their form of community existence, and their collective landholding 220 Act No. 003447 signed by Ernesto Samper Pizano, of May 27, 1997. Petitioners’ allegations on the merits received on March 10, 2008, para.187. Cf. Annex 41. First instance tutela judgment of the Civil Circuit Judge of Turbo on May 29, 1997, in favor of eight plaintiffs, mentioned in the President's response. Annex to the original petition of June 1, 2004. 221 See Annexes 79, 80 y 81. Decisions issued by the Third and Sixth Judges of the Civil Circuit of Medellin rejecting the tutela suits presented by Rosalba Córdoba Rengifo, Pascual Ávila Carmona and Pedro Manuel Pérez Florez due to a lack of competence on May 6, 1997. Annexes to the original petition of June 1, 2004. 222 Annex 41. First instance tutela judgment of the Civil Circuit Judge of Turbo on May 29, 1997, in favor of eight plaintiffs. Annex to the original petition of June 1, 2004. 223 Annex 82. Complaint on non compliance with tutela judgments against the President of the Republic, presented by Antonio Rene Córdoba, William Quejada Mosquera, Nora María Mosquera, Rosalba Córdoba Rengifo, Pascual Ávila Carmona, Jesús Arcilo Hurtado Quinto, Pedro Manuel Pérez Flores, Leovigildo Quinto Mosquera, Luis Emiro Quinto, Lourdes del Carmen Ortiz, Guillermo Vergara Serrano and Jesús Adán Quinto before the Civil Circuit Judge of Turbo, Antioquia on May 29, 1997. Annex to the initial petition of June 18, 2004. 224 SOLDEPAZ Pachakuti and other organizations. We Demand Justice for Colombia. World Calls against the Observance of Crimes and Impunity. Bogota, D.C., 2004, p.23. Petitioners’ allegations on the merits received on March 10, 2008, para.190. 225 Annex 57. Agreement for return between the Cacarica Basin Displaced Communities Temporarily Settled in Turbo, Bocas de Atrato and Bahía Cupica and the National Government of December 13, 1999. Annex to the original petition of June 1, 2004.