A/HRC/39/17/Add.3 the Human Rights Advocate and the Presidential Commission for Coordination of Human Rights Policies may attend as observers but do not always put in an appearance. According to the Office of the Human Rights Advocate, evictions have never been accompanied by a relocation plan and no provision has been made for temporary accommodation or for emergency health care, food or education. 47. The Special Rapporteur met with indigenous women evicted from the communities of La Cumbre in Alta Verapaz, who are labour tenants, and Chab’ilch’och’ in Izabal. They alleged that the population, — especially women and girls — had suffered violence and that homes, belongings and crops had been burned. The violence used in the evictions had terrified the population and some families had fled to the mountains, where they were surviving for the time being in precarious conditions that affected children, older persons and pregnant women in particular. The lack of assistance following the evictions had the effect of increasing hunger and malnutrition, which had a corresponding impact on health. 48. There were also complaints of evictions in Petén department, including Centro Uno, the Nueva Esperanza community, Vergelito and the Laguna Larga community. The latter community is under protective measures from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which are being duly implemented. It was repeatedly claimed that many of the evictions were carried out to protect private interests, including those of private companies and even organized crime. 49. The Presidential Commission for Coordination of Human Rights Policies has registered 45 evictions and reports that more than 100 appeals are outstanding, which is indicative of the magnitude of the problem. Forced evictions are being carried out despite the establishment of a high-level panel on forced evictions and an undertaking to apply international standards. The Public Prosecution Service has issued a general order setting out guidelines and blueprints for action with regard to complaints relating to trespass offences, but their implementation at the local level remains problematic. 50. The Special Rapporteur is concerned at the lack of empathy displayed by State institutions, including those responsible for monitoring human rights, in discussing this extremely serious problem. Their neglect of their responsibilities contrasts strongly with their diligence in submitting claims seeking eviction, thus leaving the persons affected in a desperately precarious and defenceless situation. B. Criminalization and attacks 51. The increasing frequency of criminal proceedings against indigenous persons who are defending their lands and resources is a matter of the most serious concern. In the majority of cases, the underlying cause is the indigenous communities’ lack of security of tenure over their land. The criminalization has led to increased social tension and a loss of confidence in the justice system on the part of indigenous people. 52. Various indigenous authorities reported that they were intending to resolve the land conflicts peacefully and, in a number of landmark cases, they submitted legal applications to enforce their rights, which went as far as the Constitutional Court. In the majority of cases, however, these applications enjoyed little success, since the justice system did not hear their claims. It is striking that, even as these applications are being ignored, many of the leaders and members of the communities submitting them are being prosecuted on criminal charges, which are heard promptly. Even in cases in which the Constitutional Court has found in favour of the communities, community leaders have been subjected to criminal trials. 53. The Special Rapporteur observed repeated examples of this kind of charge, involving accusations of aggravated trespass, unlawful association, seizure, robbery, coercion, incitement to crime and even murder; some of these do not qualify for alternatives to deprivation of liberty. She was told about arrest warrants issued on weak evidence and uncorroborated witness statements. She is also concerned at the repeated suspension of hearings, as a result of which trials are prolonged, and the long periods of pretrial detention. It is disturbing that aggravated trespass is considered a flagrant offence, which 10 GE.18-13268