- 56 - Cepeda’s right to life. In this regard, although the State reported that several different measures had been taken from those carried out during the first phase of the investigations that started in 2000, the Court notes that it was only in 2008, that they achieved results. Also, it is only now that the Prosecutor’s office has begun to tie in other investigations for facts involving individuals who were also linked to the UP. 158. The measures taken as part of this investigation have resulted in some significant progress. However, the recent execution of these measures confirms that there was no coherence in the lines of investigation previously defined by the Prosecutor, based on the complex nature of the murder Senator Cepeda in the context in which it occurred. C.3 Alleged obstacles to the investigation owing to demobilization of members of the paramilitary groups the 159. The representatives alleged that the application of the laws on demobilization have contributed to preserving impunity in relation to the Senator’s execution. They indicated that one of the authors of the murder, Edilson Jiménez Ramírez, alias “El Ñato,” had undergone the demobilization process without being properly identified and, therefore, might have enjoyed legal and financial benefits under those laws, without being subject to an exhaustive assessment of his activities as a paramilitary. They also indicated that José Vicente Castaño Gil, a paramilitary group leader at the time of the execution, was never questioned about this death or associated with the investigation, owing to Law 782 of 2002. Moreover, they alleged that the extradition of paramilitary leaders could prevent more information about the facts being obtained, even though these leaders were still providing their versión libre statements under the Justice and Peace Law (No. 975). 160. The State affirmed that Edilson Jiménez Ramírez demobilized collectively, under Decree 3360 of 2003; that, within the framework of Investigation No. 329, in conjunction with the National Unit of Justice and Peace Prosecutors and the High Commissioner for Reintegration, it had verified the information that those demobilized might have on the possible masterminds of the murder, and that the contribution of the demobilization process to learning the identity of alias “El Ñato” and to implicating José Miguel Narváez in the investigation, as presumed mastermind, “has been enormous and extremely valuable.” It also indicated that, when Edilson Jiménez Ramírez was identified as alias “El Ñato,” there was insufficient data to identify him and, even though a search was made for someone with this name and alias, it was not possible to identify him owing to lack of information. It alleged that, in 2006, when “El Ñato” demobilized, he did so using the alias “Jiménez,” which explains why it was only possible to identify him when alias ‘H.H’ mentioned this during the versión libre hearing. In other words, the State alleged that “alias ‘El Ñato’ was duly individualized at the time of demobilization but, additionally, that it was after this that he was fully identified.”230 230 In its final arguments, the State provided evidence confirming that Edilson Jiménez Ramírez demobilized with the Mineros Bloc on January 19, 2006, under the provisions of Law 782 of 2002, under the alias “Jiménez.” At that time, Mr. Jiménez Ramírez identified himself with an identity card showing that he was 35 years old and came from Aquitania. Cf. Judicial Police report No. 515704 OT. 3557 of February 2, 2010 (merits file, tome VI, attachment 2 to the final arguments brief of the State, folio 1990).