34 owing to the political situation at the time.82 128. The Attorney General’s Office took statements from the following: Graciela De León de Rodríguez, Patria Portugal, Antonia Portugal García, Norberto Antonio Navarro, Gustavo Antonio Pino Llerena, Pedro Antonio Velásquez Llerena and Marcos Tulio Pérez Herrera. On January 15, 1991, the Third Superior Prosecutor’s Office of the First Judicial District (hereinafter “the Third Prosecutor’s Office”), represented by the Prosecutor, Nelson Rovetto Madrid, asked the Second Superior Court of Justice of the First Judicial District (hereinafter “Second Superior Court”) to declare that the criminal proceeding was subject to a statute of limitations, and advised that the investigations conducted by his office had not produced evidence to incriminate anyone.83 On March 13, 1991, the Second Superior Court decreed the expansion of the preliminary proceedings84 and, on May 27, 1991, the Third Prosecutor’s Office asked the Second Superior Court to issue a provisional impersonal stay of proceedings, because the judicial measures ordered by the expansion of the preliminary proceedings had been completed without shedding any light on the investigation.85 Finally, on November 8, 1991, the Second Superior Court ordered a provisional impersonal dismissal of the preliminary proceedings, because “no dispute [had been established] between the opinions of Heliodoro Portugal and those of the Government in office.”86 129. As of that date, and for nine years, until the identification of the remains of Heliodoro Portugal in August 2000, there was no procedural activity whatsoever in the case. b) Period from 2000 to date 130. On August 24, 2000, Patria Portugal De León appeared before the Third Prosecutor’s Office to submit evidence about the identification of the remains of her father and request the re-opening of the case and the investigation into “those who were guilty of this crime.”87 On August 30, 2000, as new evidence had arisen of a violent act in which someone had died, which had not been investigated, the Attorney General’s Office, through the Third Prosecutor’s Office, asked the Second Superior Court to re-open the proceedings.88 On September 11, 2000, the Second Superior Court decreed the re-opening of the preliminary proceedings of the investigation into the death of Heliodoro Portugal and ordered that the 82 Complaint filed by Patria Portugal before the First Prosecutor’s Office, supra note 53, and testimony given by Patria Portugal before the Inter-American Court, supra note 44. 83 Cf. request for a declaration of the application of the statute of limitations to the criminal proceedings filed by the Third Superior Prosecutor’s Office of the First Judicial District of Panama on January 15, 1991 (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 9, fs. 86 to 91). 84 Cf. decision expanding the preliminary proceedings issued by the Second Superior Court of Justice of the First Judicial District of Panama on March 13, 1991 (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 10 to the application, fs. 93 to 96). 85 Cf. request for stay of proceedings presented by the Third Superior Prosecutor’s Office of the First Judicial District (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 12, f. 106). 86 Cf. judicial decision ordering a provisional stay of proceedings issued by the Second Superior Court of Justice of the First Judicial District of Panama on November 8, 1991 (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 13, fs. 108 to 114) 87 Cf. sworn statement made by Patria Portugal on August 24, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 16, fs. 127 to 129). 88 Cf. request to re-open the investigation of the Third Superior Prosecutor’s Office of the First Judicial District of Panama of August 30, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, appendixes 1 and 2, appendix 15, fs. 123 to 125).