17 * * 47. The Court has carefully examined the statements and arguments given by the parties and the evidence they offered. It has evaluated them mindful of the time and place wherein they occurred. It has concluded that the evidence produced during these proceedings has not been sufficient for the Court to find that Hernán Lizcano Jacanamejoy was executed by State forces in violation of Article 4 of the American Convention. VII VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 8 AND 25 RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND RIGHT TO JUDICIAL PROTECTION 48. With regard to the violation of articles 8 and 25 of the Convention, given the facts admitted in the instant case the local proceedings need to be examined. * * 49. Concerning the disciplinary proceeding that the Office of Investigation and Discipline of the Putumayo Police Department Command instituted against the members of the police force who participated in the operation, the Court notes that from the time the investigating officer instituted the inquiry to the time when the police commandant -who was also the superior of the agents being investigateddeclared the investigation closed and cleared the participants in that operation of all wrongdoing, the proceeding lasted a total of five days. The Putumayo Prosecutor’s Office, the Office of the Special Prosecutor for the Defense of Human Rights, the Nariño Administrative Law Court and the General Bureau of Police serving as court of first instance, found that the disciplinary proceeding was flawed with irregularities; it was handled in such haste that it precluded any investigation of the facts and ultimately had the effect of foreclosing criminal prosecution for the crime of obstruction of justice. Furthermore, the Court observes that the “judge” in the disciplinary proceeding was both judge and party. This alone was sufficient to deny the victims and their next of kin their right to the judicial guarantees recognized in the Convention. The haste in which this disciplinary proceeding was conducted precluded an examination of evidence and only the parties to participate were the implicated parties (the police officers). * * 50. The military criminal proceeding began on January 29, 1991, with the Military Examining Court 75. The case remained in the military justice system until March 25, 1998, when it was transferred to the ordinary criminal justice system. In the military justice system, the judges assigned to hear the case were with the National Police, as were the suspected material authors of the acts. Compounding this is the fact that the National Police was under the Ministry of Defense, which is in the executive branch of government. 51. The Court has already established that in a democratic state of laws, the criminal military jurisdiction is to be restricted and exceptional in scope and intended to protect special juridical interests associated with the functions that the law assigns to the military forces. Hence, military personnel are to be tried for