be held with the prosecutors (leading and assistant prosecutors), investigators and analysts in order to outline the leads to be followed, and to propose a timetable of activities; (5) regular meetings will be held between the Justice and Peace Unit and the Human Rights Unit, in which collaboration and coordination between the two units will be encouraged in order to obtain rapidly the versions of those demobilized about the events, and (6) the Prosecution will examine the possibility of filing an application for review in the case of La Granja with regard to the decision of April 9, 2002, precluding the investigation of the brothers Jaime and Francisco Angulo. 8. In its last report, the State indicated that it had concentrated the investigation of the three cases in the Tenth Prosecutor’s Office attached to the National Human Rights Unit; that the office had ordered the involvement in the investigation of senior Army and National Police officials, and that committee meetings were being held to monitor the investigations under the leadership of the Head of the said Unit. The State described the measures taken since February 2011. In addition it indicated that, once confirmed, the results would be published. 9. The representatives indicated that the State had disregarded important information that involves senior State officials, from the Army and the Police, and the Executive, and stressed the delay in prosecuting Isaías Montes despite the 1998 testimony of Enrique Villalba. They added that the investigation had not elaborated methodical plans with appropriate working hypotheses to investigate all those involved effectively, including civil and military authorities who had been named by both the paramilitary leader Salvatore Mancuso, and by Enrique Villalba who has been murdered. The representatives suggested to the State that it create “a working group to advance the criminal investigations, with the special appointment of a coordinating prosecutor, the participation of at least the prosecutors in charge of the investigations, the special delegate criminal prosecutors for the investigations, the Human Rights Directorates of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and of the office of the Vice President of the Republic, and also the representatives of the victims.” Regarding the measures proposed by the State (supra para. 7), the representatives considered that they had not been implemented satisfactorily and, even though they welcomed the State’s intention to improve the investigation methods, they insisted in the proposal they had presented in the hearing before the Court. According to the representatives, the State’s plan continues to omit: a. Incorporation into the same task force of special delegate criminal prosecutors for the investigations, representatives of the Human Rights Directorates of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and of the office of the Vice President of the Republic, and representatives of the victims, so as to ensure following up on theories and lines of work that are different from those that the Prosecution has been following for more than 10 years. b. Determination of the objectives of the work, such as identification of the main obstacles that have hampered the development of the investigations, and the mechanism to remove them; joint elaboration of a methodical investigation plan with the participation of State agents; design and execution of a plan of activities that includes the questioning of the paramilitary leaders who have been extradited, and identification of probative elements that must still be obtained, to be examined by the Technical Investigations Unit. 10. In addition, the representatives indicated that no publicity has been given to the limited results of the criminal proceedings that are final, as ordered by the Court. They insisted that the obstacles to obtaining justice in this case include: 5