105 358. Based on the determinations of fact one can conclude that Mmes. Mosquera, Naranjo, and Yarce filed a complaint with the Office of the Prosecutor-Delegate for Human Rights seeking to have a disciplinary investigation and disciplinary sanctions for the public servants responsible for their arbitrary detentions.521 On June 29, 2006, it was ordered that an investigation be initiated into a Third Corporal, and that several items of evidence be collected.522 The State has reported that on November 9, 2007, based on the evidence produced in the investigation, the Office of the Inspector General ordered that it be archived.523 359. It can be surmised from this information that more than ten years have elapsed since the arbitrary detention of Ms. Mosquera, Naranjo and Yarce without responsibility of public officials being duly established for the violation of their rights. The Commission reiterates that when public officials commit human rights violations against women, such as an arbitrary detention, they have the obligation to investigate the systemic failures that led to these violations, in order to prevent their repetition.524 That entails an impartial, serious and thorough investigation of the agencies of the State that participated in the arbitrary detention that is the subject of this matter, including a thorough investigation of the individual actions of the members of the army and the national police involved.525 The States must hold the public officials responsible – through administrative, disciplinary or criminal procedure – when they have acted unlawfully.526 The State must undertake the systematic investigation on its own initiative and promptly.527 Delay in this investigation amounts to a form of impunity for the arbitrary detention of Mrs. Mosquera, Naranjo y Yarce, and fosters the repetition thereof.528 360. Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that the State failed in its duty to act with due diligence in order to investigate and punish promptly and adequately with regard to the arbitrary detention of Mmes Naranjo, Mosquera, and Yarce, in breach of Articles 8.1 and 25 of the same instrument, in connection with Article 1.1 thereof, and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. H. Right to Personal Integrity of the Next of Kin of the Victims (Article 5.1), in connection with Article 1.1 of the American Convention 521 File No. 008-82861, joined to number 008-082154, cited in the initial petition in the matter of Socorro Mosquera Londoño and Mery Naranjo Jiménez – Comuna 13, March 7, 2005, p. 7. 522 Note DDH. GOI No. 31279/1533 from the Colombian State, June 14, 2006, p. 8. 523 Note DIDHD/GOI No. 77119/2954 from the Colombian State, November 15, 2012, p. 50. 524 IACHR, Merits Report No. 80/11, Case 12.626, Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) et al, United States, July 21, 2011, pars. 178-179. 525 IACHR, Merits Report Nº 28/07, Cases 12.496-12.498, Claudia Ivette González et al, (Mexico), March 9, 2007, par. 242, Recommendation 2. 526 IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 68 (January 20, 2007), par. 77; United Nations, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Measures for the Elimination of Violence against Women, resolution approved by the United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/52/86, February 2, 1998, Annex, Section II. 527 IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 68 (January 20, 2007), par. 77; United Nations, Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Measures for the Elimination of Violence against Women, resolution approved by the United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/52/86, February 2, 1998, Annex, Section II. 528 IACHR, Human Rights Situation of Women in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, OEA/Ser. L/V/II.117. Doc. 44 (March 7, 2003), par. 142; IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II, Doc. 68 (January 20, 2007), Recommendation 1.