indictment was issued against Elkin Dario Granada López, Alexander Vallejo Echeverry, Gilma Patricia Gaviria Palacio, Jorge Eliécer Rodríguez Guzmán, and Alvaro Goez Mesa as material coperpetrators of the crime of homicide, and as co-perpetrators of the crime of belonging to illegal armed groups. In addition, an indictment was handed down against Omar Tobón Echeverry as mastermind (determinador) of the crime of aggravated homicide. 19. In March 2001, the Specialized Court of Medellín convicted Alberto Goez Mesa and Jorge Eliécer Rodríguez Guzmán, sentencing them to 40 years of prison as material co-perpetrators of the homicide of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, and Carlos Castaño Gil to 20 years of imprisonment and payment of a fine, as co-perpetrator of the crime of forming, directing, and financing groups operating outside the law. The other accused were acquitted in the same judgment. The decision was challenged before Criminal Judges of the Specialized Circuit, both by the convicts’ public defenders and by the Fiscalía Delegada. On June 25, 2001, the Superior Court of Medellín confirmed the decision below and reduced the sentence imposed on Carlos Castaño Gil from 20 to nine years of imprisonment, and that of Alvaro Mesa Goez and Jorge Eliécer Rodríguez Guzmán from 40 to 25 years of imprisonment, applying the principle of in dubio pro reo and the entry into force of the new Criminal Code. 20. When the indictment was issued, it was ordered that the procedural unity of the case be split, and the investigation continued, under Case No. 343431. In the context of these proceedings, the arrest of Nicolás Ángel García Graciano or Fredy Hernández Ramírez or Restrepo was ordered, for the crimes of belonging to illegal armed groups, aggravated homicide, and unaggravated kidnapping of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo and his sister. On March 16, 2000, an indictment was handed down against the persons who, in the course of the investigation, were determined to be suspects. On December 19, 2001, it was ordered that evidence be taken, along with other investigative steps, to determine the responsibility of other persons in the homicide of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo. 21. The State alleges that in the disciplinary realm, on June 13, 2002, the Human Rights Prosecutor’s Office (Procuraduría Delegada para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos) archived the preliminary inquiry into the responsibility of State agents in the homicide of Jesús María Valle, for lack of evidence raising suspicions concerning public employees. 22. As for the determination of State responsibility in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction, the process for direct reparations, begun March 16, 2000, by María Magdalena Valle Jaramillo before the Administrative Tribunal of Antioquia, against the national government, the Ministry of Defense, the National Army, the National Police, the Ministry of Interior, the Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad (DAS), the department of Antioquia, and the municipal government of Medellín, is in the evidence phase. 23. Based on this information, the State considers that it is discharging its obligation to investigate, prosecute, and punish the persons responsible for the crime within a reasonable period of time. It alleges that the petitioner’s claim in relation to the alleged failure to clarify the facts of the crime is based on a disagreement over the outcome of the judicial proceeding, and that therefore it should be dismissed by the IACHR, for if it were to hear the matter, it would be acting as a fourth instance. 24. The State also alleges that the petition is inadmissible for failure to meet the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies, given that the contentious-administrative proceeding is pending resolution, and the criminal investigation has yet to draw to a close. It alleges that the exceptions to this requirement are not applicable, given that there has been no unwarranted delay in the proceedings in this matter. IV. ANALYSIS OF COMPETENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence 25. The petitioners are authorized, in principle, by Article 44 of the American Convention to submit complaints to the IACHR. The petition states as the alleged victims individuals in 4