A/HRC/10/36 page 5 addressed to the Government concerned. The replies received from two Governments to four of these communications have been summarized in the present report. In this context, it is worth mentioning that within the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, established by the Council in its resolution 7/8, the Special Rapporteur was requested, inter alia, “to seek, receive, examine and respond to information on the situation and the rights of anyone, acting individually or in association with others, to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms”. 5. It should be noted that in many cases it has not been possible to record in this report additional cases due to specific security concerns or because the individuals exposed to reprisals have explicitly requested not to publicly raise their cases. It should also be noted that almost all the information contained in this report is also reflected in the reports of each individual mechanism presented to the General Assembly or the Human Rights Council. 6. While this report only mentions a few States, it is in no way intended to be selective; this rather reflects the limited nature of the mandate on which the report is based. Indeed, it is important to note that this mandate limits reporting to cases in which individuals have faced reprisals for having cooperated with representatives of United Nations human rights bodies - this includes treaty bodies, special procedures and the Universal Periodic Review - or those who are relatives of victims of human rights violations. A substantial amount of information covering a larger number of States was collected concerning reprisals against individuals having cooperated with human rights components of the field presences of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the International Criminal Court. However, as these types of reprisals are not covered in the resolutions creating this mandate, these cases will not be reflected in the present report. 7. Finally, it should be noted that the cases described in this report do not necessarily represent the totality of acts of intimidation or reprisal against individuals or groups who seek to cooperate with United Nations human rights bodies. Such acts may in many instances be unreported due to lack of access to appropriate means of communication or fear of further reprisals. B. Summary of cases 8. The following paragraphs cover a variety of situations in which persons have been intimidated or suffered reprisals for having cooperated with United Nations human rights bodies, for having availed themselves of international procedures, for having provided legal assistance for this purpose, and/or as relatives of victims of human rights violations. 1. Colombia 9. On 29 December 2008, an urgent appeal was sent by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in relation to the murder of Mr. Edwin Legarda. Mr. Legarda was married to Ms. Aida Quilcué Vivas, a principal counsellor in the Indigenous Regional Council of Cauca (CRIC) and a leading indigenous rights activist in Colombia who