Related Rule
Colombia
Practice Relating to Rule 98. Enforced Disappearance
Colombia’s Basic Military Manual (1995) provides: “It is prohibited to deprive [the civilian population] of its liberty (sequestration, enforced disappearances).” 
Colombia, Derecho Internacional Humanitario – Manual Básico para las Personerías y las Fuerzas Armadas de Colombia, Ministerio de Defensa Nacional, 1995, p. 30.
In 2005, in the Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated with regard to deceased victims of enforced disappearance:
All necessary measures must be adopted in order to deliver the body to [the victim’s] … relatives. This obligation must be fulfilled irrespective of whether the identity of the perpetrator of the disappearance or killing is identified and of whether an investigation of those allegedly responsible is opened. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, Judgment of 10 May 2005, § 58.
In 2007, in the Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
Taking into account … the development of customary international humanitarian law applicable in internal armed conflicts, the Constitutional Court notes that the fundamental guarantees stemming from the principle of humanity, some of which have attained ius cogens status, … [include] the prohibition of enforced disappearances. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, Judgment of 25 April 2007, p. 112.
[footnote in original omitted]
In 2005, in the Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
The objective of the urgent tracing mechanism is for judicial authorities to immediately exercise every diligence for the purpose of finding out the location of those presumed missing. Therefore, … the urgent tracing mechanism has a preventive goal regarding the commission of the crime of enforced disappearance. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, Judgment of 10 May 2005, § 33.
Colombia’s Basic Military Manual (1995) provides that “in time of peace, States have the obligation to take preventive measures”, inter alia, to “create efficient mechanisms enabling disappeared persons to be located”. 
Colombia, Derecho Internacional Humanitario – Manual Básico para las Personerías y las Fuerzas Armadas de Colombia, Ministerio de Defensa Nacional, 1995, p. 27.
Colombia’s Law on the Urgent Tracing Mechanism (2005) states in a chapter entitled “The Urgent Tracing Mechanism for the Prevention of the Crime of Enforced Disappearance”:
The urgent tracing mechanism is a public mechanism that protects the freedom, personal integrity and the other rights and safeguards from which persons benefit who are presumed to have disappeared.
Under no circumstances may the urgent tracing mechanism be considered as an obstacle, limitation or previous stage in constitutional habeas corpus proceedings or in a criminal investigation of the facts. 
Colombia, Law on the Urgent Tracing Mechanism, 2005, Article 1.
The Law also states: “Anybody who knows that a person has probably disappeared may request any judicial authority to activate the urgent tracing mechanism.” 
Colombia, Law on the Urgent Tracing Mechanism, 2005, Article 2.
In 2005, in the Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
Both the obligation of the official to gather certain information when receiving the [tracing] request and the obligation to investigate and examine other sources if the person submitting the [tracing] request is unable to provide all the information strengthen the active role that judicial authorities in charge of carrying out the urgent tracing mechanism must assume. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-473/05, Judgment of 10 May 2005, § 40.
In 2005, in the Constitutional Case No. C-575/05, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
[T]he specific mention in … [Law 975 of 2005] of the victims and their relatives and the knowledge of the fate of the disappeared or kidnapped cannot be understood but as Congress’ intention to underscore that it shall be the relatives of the kidnapped and disappeared who become the primary recipients of information regarding the victims, without this implying any restriction whatsoever to other victims’ right to know the truth, or to society’s more general right to know the truth. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-575/05, Judgment of 25 July 2005, p. 234.
In 2006, in the Constitutional Case No. C-370/06, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
Article 12 of the Constitution, which prohibits enforced disappearance, and the Inter-American Convention on Enforced Disappearance … stipulate inter alia the State’s obligation to seriously investigate the crime of enforced disappearance and to inform the victims and their families about the result of the investigations and the fate of the disappeared persons. This obligation must be immediately and officially complied with and does not require that the victims initiate or further the investigations. In addition, satisfactory compliance with this obligation requires the State to adopt all necessary measures to establish the whereabouts of disappeared persons as soon as possible since a delay of the investigation or of providing information to the interested persons constitutes a violation of the right of the disappeared persons’ relatives not to be subjected to cruel treatment. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-370/06, Judgment of 18 May 2006, § 6.2.2.2.4.
[footnote in original omitted]