- 38 - observing and analyzing all the facts that culminated in the execution, in order to gauge the scope of the State’s responsibility. 140 104. The Court observes that it appears that the above-mentioned sergeants took part in other crimes before and after the death of Senator Cepeda Vargas, while they were in active service with the Army.141 Records show that these sergeants were investigated for at least three murders in which they allegedly participated together, the first of these in 1993.142 The State has even recognized that, while they were deprived of liberty, the sergeants took part in a military operation that resulted in another disciplinary sanction for them and for a lieutenant colonel, who was discharged.143 In this regard, the Attorney General’s office indicated that these sergeants had a record of crimes “in the context of the dirty war.”144 In this respect, it is worth noting that, even before the Senator’s murder, in the general recommendations concerning penal and disciplinary matters included in his 1992 report on cases of murder of members of the Patriotic Union and Esperanza, Paz y Libertad [Hope, Peace and Freedom] parties, the Ombudsman had indicated that “the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation should take preliminary measures in the case of punishable acts that, in principle, presumably involve members of the Army until, in addition to the functional connection, the relationship of the facts with active service has been established.”145 105. In addition to the sergeants convicted for the facts of the instant case being on active service, because they perpetrated Senator Cepeda’s execution while they were supposedly attending a training course,146 the Court finds that the superior officers of the two sergeants knew, or at least, should have know that these sergeants had been investigated for the perpetration of several crimes prior to the execution of Senator Cepeda Vargas. This resulted in an obligation for the superior officers to adopt reasonable, specific and effective measures to end the human rights violations committed by their subordinates, and for the competent authorities to punish those responsible for these acts.147 140 In this regard, the Attorney General’s office indicated that “[d]uring the proceedings, it was proved that many people had intervened in the illegal operation that ended Senator Cepeda’s life; some of them belonged to the Army, and have been sentenced and convicted by the courts, and others were members of the so-called selfdefense groups, and a court ruling on their responsibility is excluded because one of them died a violent death after executing the crime of murdering the Senator, and a separate investigation is being conducted against another.” Opinion of the office of the Attorney General of the Republic on the legality of the second instance ruling in relation to Investigation No. 18,428, supra note 101, folio 1842. 141 Decision issued by the office of the Second District Attorney of Santafé de Bogotá in case No. 143-6444/96 in 1999, supra note 81, folios 1467 and 1476. Also, report of the National Directorate of Prosecution Services of the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation of June 11, 2009 (evidence file, tome XXI, helpful evidence presented by the State, folio 8963) and ruling of sole instance issued by the Vice President of the office of the Attorney General of the Nation in Investigation No. 002-61126-02 on February 27, 2004 (evidence file, tome X, attachment 164 to the brief with pleadings, motions and evidence, folios 4439 to 4440). 142 Cf. report of the National Directorate of Prosecution Services of the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation of June 11, 2009, supra note 141, folio 8963. 143 Cf. ruling of sole instance issued by the Vice President of the office of the Attorney General of the Nation in Investigation No. 002-61126-02 on February 27, 2004, supra note 141, folios 4439 to 4492. 144 Decision issued by the office of the Second District Attorney of Santafé de Bogotá in case No. 143-6444/96 in 1999, supra note 81, folio 1477. 145 Report of the Ombudsman entitled “Estudio de casos de homicidio de miembros de la Unión Patriótica y Esperanza, Paz y Libertad,” supra note 76, folio 1293. 146 Cf. Judgment handed down by the Third Criminal Court of the Santafé de Bogotá Specialized Circuit in Investigation No. 5393-3 on December 16, 1999, supra note 75, folios 1739 and 1447 to 1448. 147 Cf. United Nations, Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), principle 19; United Nations, Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, article 5;