- 51 - “Candelillo”), Pio Nono Franco Bedoya, Victor Alcidez Giraldo (alias “El Tocayo”),201 and Edilson Jiménez (alias “El Ñato”), although the cause of the latter’s death remains to be determined.202 In 1998, an attempt was made to implicate then Brigadier General Herrera Luna, but it was declared that the criminal action had extinguished owing to the death of the accused (supra paras. 106 to 108). 143. On December 16, 1999, the Third Criminal Court of the Special Circuit of Santafé de Bogotá delivered judgment sentencing Sergeants Hernando Medina Camacho and Justo Gil Zúñiga Labrador to 43 years’ imprisonment, and acquitted Carlos Castaño Gil.203 144. This judgment was appealed by the representatives of the convicted men, and also by Senator Cepeda’s next of kin. The latter filed an appeal owing to the acquittal of Carlos Castaño Gil. The Prosecutor’s office also questioned this acquittal, and the office of the Attorney General of the Nation, acting as Ministerio Público, expressed its agreement with the judgment as regards the conviction of the two sergeants. On January 18, 2001, the Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of the Bogotá Judicial district ratified all aspects of the judgment in first instance.204 An appeal for review of this decision was filed before the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice by the convicted men, and also by the next of kin of Senator Cepeda Vargas, constituted in civil party, particularly with regard to the above-mentioned acquittal and considering, inter alia, that the judge had “completely disregarded the national situation in relation to the connections between State officials and the so-called ‘paramilitary’ groups, previously denounced by members of the [UP].” 145. In parallel to the cassation proceedings, the next of kin of Senator Cepeda Vargas filed an action for protection of constitutional rights before the Civil Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice against the decision of the Criminal Cassation Chamber refusing to admit the book “Mi Confesión” as evidence. This action for protection was rejected on June 27, 2003, on the grounds that the decisions of the said criminal court “are now res judicata, [and consequently] cannot be contested by the action for protection of constitutional rights.”205 Lastly, on November 10, 2004, the 201 Cf. Judgment handed down by the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice in Investigation No. 18,428 on November 10, 2004, supra note 163, folio 1873; Decision issued by the National Terrorism Unit of the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation in Investigation No. 22461 on February 29, 1996, supra note 163, folios 4147 to 4149, and letter signed by “The man who called from Chía” addressed to the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation on November 21, 1994, supra note 161, folio 4423. 202 Cf. Profile of Edilson Jiménez, alias “El Ñato,” submitted to the office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation on August 21, 2008, and first report of his death; procedure during which the doctor who performed the autopsy on Edilson Jiménez, alias “El Ñato,” gave testimony on October 7, 2009, and note of the DAS of May 19, 2009, opening the investigations to determine the cause of death of Edilson Jiménez, alias “El Ñato” (evidence file, tome XXVIII, helpful evidence presented by the State, folios 10766 to 10768 and tome XXIX; helpful evidence presented by the State, folios 10885, 10893-10901 and 10979-10990). 203 Cf. Judgment delivered by the Third Criminal Court of the Santafé de Bogotá Specialized Circuit in Investigation No. 5393-3 on December 16, 1999, supra note 75, folio 1656. 204 Cf. Judgment delivered by the Criminal Chamber of the Bogotá High Court in proceedings 99-5393-01 on January 18, 2001 (evidence file, tome IX, attachment 146 to the brief with pleadings, motions and evidence, folio 4176). 205 Cf. Civil Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, decision of June 27, 2003, Presiding Judge Carlos Ignacio Jaramillo Jaramillo (evidence file, tome XI, attachment 172 to the brief with pleadings, motions and evidence, folio 4685). Iván Cepeda Castro, among others, filed an application for review of this decision before the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court, in a decision of February 3, 2004, recognized the right of private individuals to go before any judge to request the protection of any right they considered violated by the proceedings of a Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice. Cf. Judgment on review of action for protection of constitutional rights handed down by the Constitutional Court of Colombia in Ruling No. 004/04 of February 3, 2004 (evidence file, tome IV, attachment 39 to the application, folios 1993 to 1999).