A/HRC/WGEID/101/1 means that, for instance, members of guerrilla groups (whether actual or perceived) who were victims of enforced disappearance would not be considered as such, and that their families would be deprived of the right to reparation and to the truth. The source also alleges that the so-called Legal Framework for Peace contains several provisions contrary to the right to justice for families. 41. Furthermore, the source indicates that members of organizations of relatives of the disappeared have allegedly constantly been threatened and been the victims of attacks. In that regard, it is noted that, on 24 January 2013, Martha Elena Díaz Ospina, founder and President of the Association of Families United by a Single Sorrow (AFUSODO), an organization that supports mothers of victims of enforced disappearances at the hands of the military, and a member of the Atlantic branch of the National Movement for Victims of State Crimes, received a death threat signed by the paramilitary group Los Rastrojos. Between July and September 2012, a number of threats against the Association of Relatives of the Disappeared (ASFADDES) and its members were reported; incidents of surveillance and photo-taking directed at the organization were also reported. The source also reported that the Nydia Erika Bautista Foundation for Human Rights (FNEB) and its directors had allegedly been the subject of repeated illegal intelligence operations. For example, in late November 2012, FNEB reported the monitoring and surveillance of the Foundation by a police officer, as well as by an individual travelling in an official vehicle. Despite having been documented and reported, those incidents have allegedly not been investigated. The source emphasizes that FNEB has been under State protection since mid-2011. Observations 42. The Working Group is deeply concerned about the alleged murder of, or death threats against, lawyers working on cases of enforced disappearance. In this respect, the Working Group would like to recall article 13 the Declaration, which provides that “steps shall be taken to ensure that all involved in the investigation [of an enforced disappearance], including the complainant, counsel, witnesses and those conducting the investigation, are protected against ill-treatment, intimidation or reprisal” (para. 3) and that “steps shall be taken to ensure that any ill-treatment, intimidation or reprisal or any other form of interference on the occasion of the lodging of a complaint or during the investigation procedure is appropriately punished” (para. 5). 11. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Standard procedure 43. The Working Group transmitted 12 cases under its standard procedure. In accordance with the Working Group’s methods of work, the Government of the Republic of Korea received copies of those cases. 44. The first case concerned Mr. Gi-man Eom, who was allegedly abducted on 7 August 1968, when Deoksu-2 ho, the fishing boat he worked on, was reportedly captured by forces of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Mr. Eom was below the age of 18 at the time of the alleged abduction. 45. The second case concerned Mr. Gwang-mo Jeong, who was allegedly abducted on 5 June 1970, when I-2, the navy ship Mr. Jeong served on, was reportedly captured by forces of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. 46. The third case concerned Mr. Dal-young Kim, who was allegedly abducted on 4 February 1972, when the boat he worked on, Anyoung 35-ho, was reportedly forced into Democratic People’s Republic of Korea waters by armed vessels of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. 7