34 113. As far as the first element is concerned, the Court considers that the death of Mrs. Kawas-Fernández does not reflect features that render the case complex. There is only one victim who is clearly identified, and from the very beginning of the investigation there have been indications as to the identity of the perpetrators and instigators of the crime (supra paras. 53, 54 and 57). As regards the second element, there is no evidence that the relatives of Mrs. Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández have taken actions aimed at suspending investigations. On the contrary, it has been established that the brother of Mrs. Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández repeatedly provided accommodation and traveling expenses to the DGIC agents who were to perform investigation procedures in the area137 (infra para. 169). 114. As shown by the body of evidence (supra paras. 55 to 68), the inefficacy of domestic resources is attributable only to the conduct of the authorities in charge of directing proceedings, who first kept the investigation inactive for eight years, and, once resumed, adopted no further measures and, second, implemented measures aimed at deviating the investigation and intimidating witnesses (supra paras. 57 and 59). Particularly, the Court finds that the participation of Judges and prosecutors of the Attorney General’s Office has also been evidently inadequate during the investigation.138 In that regard, in its technical legal report, the Attorney General’s Office set forth that: “even though the judge has the power to order performing certain procedures based on its power to direct proceedings, such procedures have not been completed, thus causing an unjustified delay in the clarification of the case and, hence, the finding of justice. […] The Attorney General’s Office has had no active participation in proceedings since there has been no order to perform the procedures necessary to achieve an acknowledgment of responsibility by the perpetrators of the events.”139 115. As regards the fourth element, the Court has held that, in order to determine whether the term is reasonable, regard must be had to how the legal situation of the person involved in the proceeding has been impaired by its duration, considering, among other things, the subject-matter of the dispute. The Court has thus determined that where the lapse of time has a relevant impact on the individual’s legal situation, the proceeding will need to be conducted more diligently in order that the case may be resolved in a brief period of time.140 In the instant case, it is the Court’s view that this element does not need to be analyzed in order to determine whether the duration of the investigation and the proceedings initiated due to the victim’s death is reasonable. Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 30, 2008. Series C No. 187, para. 107; and Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 8, para. 155. 136 Cf. Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 8, para. 155. 137 Official letter signed by Licenciado Luis Javier Santos-Cruz, Coordinator of the Attorney General’s Office in and for Tela, November 5, 2003 (record of appendixes to the answer to the application, appendix 8, folio 2366). 138 Cf. official letter of November 23, 2006 addressed to the coordinator of prosecutors by the Court of First Instance in and for Tela (record of appendixes to the answer to the application, appendix 8, folio 2427). 139 Cf. Technical Legal Report No. DCAT-SATJ- AFS 022/2003, supra note 31. 140 Cf. Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 8, para. 155.