79 282. The Commission deems that there has been an excessive and unjustified delay in the proceedings. It also deems that the defendants’ confession does not relieve the authorities of a State of their duty to diligently investigate the events. As established by the IACHR, in the context of the Justice and Peace Law, a confession is not enough for a full clarification of the events, and therefore the State will need to exhaust all investigative mechanisms within its power to ensure achieving the truth.388 These investigative activities must be conducted with due diligence and within a reasonable period of time. That is because a complete and diligent investigation of the events is also the foundation for effective verification of eligibility for lenient sentencing as provided for by the Justice and Peace Law and for keeping that benefit in the future. 283. In the present case, the Commission deems that the State has not fulfilled this obligation. The IACHR observes that the case file provides no information regarding the steps taken in the framework of Justice and Peace Law to corroborate the information provided by Ramón Isaza, as well as to clarify what happened to the victims. Likewise, the Commission stresses that the information provided by Ramón Isaza regarding the rivers where the bodies of the victims had supposedly been dumped requires the State to undertake a search for their remains, which never did occur. 284. Second, the Commission stresses that, in criminal proceedings No. 233, Army Major Carlos Guzmán Lombana was found to be involved as one of those charged. The IACHR also observes that, in the framework of criminal proceedings No. 752.065, on the last page of the case file there is a request from the prosecutor in charge of the investigation addressed to the UNHR Coordinator requesting that both “proceedings” be merged “because they deal with the same events (…) (and) the same perpetrators: former militants of the Rural Workers Self-Defense Forces of Magdalena Medio (…) and agents (…) of the National Army.” 285. Thus, the Commission notes that, in the resolutions of April 22 and July 13, 2009, the Prosecution Unit for Justice and Peace requested that both proceedings be suspended with respect to Ramón Isaza “to continue focusing on the other persons involved in the case.” Nevertheless, the IACHR observes that, according to the information that was received, the investigation against Army Major Carlos Guzmán Lombana or any other member of the National Army was discontinued in ordinary court proceedings. 286. The Commission considers that the State, as a result of its treaty obligation to investigate severe human rights violations, must continue and promote in ordinary courts of justice the investigation that is required regarding other stakeholders who have not been demobilized on the basis of the information disclosed as a result of the Justice and Peace proceedings. The IACHR stresses that said obligation is aimed at guaranteeing an integral reconstruction of the truth, as well as a complete investigation of the power structures involved in the present events of the case. 287. Thus, the Commission considers that, by not continuing the investigation in ordinary court proceedings, despite the evidence that was gathered and the confession made by Ramón Isaza in the Justice and Peace proceedings with regard to the participation of the National Army in the events, the State failed to fulfill its obligation to diligently investigate the events. 388 IACHR, Statement by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the Application and Scope of the Justice and Peace Law in Colombia, 2006, paragraph 27.