they sought to go to his aid after the shooting occurred, which would make them accomplices. 19. In that regard, the petitioners argue that the State has yet to investigate or release any findings about Mirey Trueba’s failure to receive assistance; that is, regarding the time elapsed from the moment he was seriously injured by the shots fired by the soldier to the time he was put in an ambulance; or regarding the three hours during which his companions were prevented from reaching the scene of the incident in order to assist him. 20. The petitioners further state that the person responsible was investigated, tried, and punished by the military courts due to the fact that on August 30, 1998, the Public Prosecution Service declined jurisdiction in the matter and referred the case to the Military Judge in Mazatlán, Sinaloa, where criminal proceeding 3979/98 was opened. Lt. Col. Raúl Morales Rodríguez was sentenced to eight years in prison and barred from the military for the same period of time. He appealed and on January 19, 2001, the Supreme Military Court reduced his sentence to 1 year, 11 months, and 15 days in prison, on the grounds that it was a case of homicide from misadventure. 21. The petitioners argue that the soldier responsible for the death of Mirey Trueba should have been tried in a civilian court, not by the military courts as was designated, since the latter lacked jurisdiction, independence, and impartiality, given that the military was trying one of its own officers. They indicate that when a military court takes up a matter that belongs in a regular court it violates the principle of natural jurisdiction and, a fortiori, due process, which, in turn, is intimately associated with the right of access to justice. For that reason, they hold that the State infringed Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention.4 22. As to proportionality of the punishment, the petitioners report that Lt. Col. Raúl Morales Rodríguez, who was sentenced to eight years in prison and barred from the military for the same period of time, appealed his conviction and the Supreme Military Court, on January 19, 2001, reduced his sentence to 1 year, 11 months, and 15 days in prison, on the grounds that it was a case of homicide through misadventure. The petitioners consider that the penalty ultimately imposed on Lt. Col. Raúl Morales Rodríguez was not commensurate with the crime committed. 23. They also say that a feature of military proceedings is that they are confidential and closed, which denies victims and their next of kin the right to know about the progress of investigations as well as the right to the truth, and, for 4 Petitioners’ communication of January 29, 2002. 5