of Ms. Grisonas Andrijauskaite. Both people were sentenced as co-perpetrators to six years in prison and "[special disqualification] to hold public office for double the time of the prison term." The judgment acquitted the two defendants of the crime of "aggravated homicide by conspiracy" for the death of Julien Cáceres. In 2019, this acquittal was vacated. As of the date of issuance of this Judgment, a ruling is awaited from the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on a motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of appeal. 173. In case 3002 (“Automotores Orletti V”), a conviction was handed down in 2021 against four people (previously prosecuted in the framework of cases 1627 and 1976) for the crimes of “abduction, retention, and concealment of a minor under the age of 10 […] concurrent […] with […] illegal deprivation of liberty committed by a public official with abuse of authority or without the formalities prescribed by law, aggravated by the mediation of violence or threats, concurrent […] with the […] imposition of torture,” to the detriment of Anatole and Victoria. The judges found the defendants responsible for other acts committed to the detriment of multiple victims and handed down sentences of "[life imprisonment and absolute and perpetual disqualification from public service]," “comprehensive of what was ordered” in the different prior processes. 174. Independently of the previous processes, in cases 1351, 1499, 1604, 1584, 1730, and 1772 (“Systematic plan for the appropriation of children”), in 2012, Federal Oral Criminal Court No. 6 sentenced one of the former members of the first Military Junta that governed during the dictatorship for the crimes of “abduction, retention, and concealment of a minor under ten years of age in conjunction […] with rendering uncertain the civil status of a minor under the age of ten,” to the detriment of Anatole and Victoria. The judges imposed on the convict the “[single sentence of life imprisonment and absolute perpetual disqualification from holding public office]” as the perpetrator of different crimes committed against multiple victims. 175. The Court views positively the progress made by the Argentine authorities to identify, prosecute, and punish those responsible for the acts committed against Ms. Grisonas Andrijauskaite and her children, Anatole and Victoria, in the framework of the efforts undertaken to clarify the serious human rights violations perpetrated during the 1976-1983 period. Thus, the handing down in 2021 of a conviction in connection with the facts of which Anatole and Victoria were victims, means the State fulfilled its obligation to investigate and punish the crimes committed against them, and therefore it would be out of order to hold the State responsible for violation of Articles 1, 6, and 8 of the ICPPT. 176. Next, the Court will examine the guarantee of a reasonable time. The Court reiterates that pursuant to Article 8(1) of the American Convention and as part of the right to justice, the processes must be carried out within a reasonable time. 190 Therefore, in view of the need to guarantee the rights of the affected persons, a prolonged delay may constitute, by itself, a violation of judicial guarantees. 191 Evaluation of the reasonable time must be conducted for each specific case with regard to the total length of the process, from the first procedural action until the issuance of the final judgment, including the remedies that may be filed before different instances. 192 177. The case law has established that four elements must be taken into account in determining whether the guarantee of reasonable time is met, namely: (a) the complexity of Cf. Case of Genie Lacayo v. Nicaragua. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of January 29, 1997. Series C No. 30, par. 77; Case of Guachala Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 26, 2021. Series C No. 423, par. 211, and Case of Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, par. 82. 191 Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 21, 2002. Series C No. 94, par. 145, and Case of Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, par. 82. 192 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Merits. Judgment of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, par. 71, and Case of Ríos Avalos et al. v. Paraguay, supra par. 166. 190 46