4 Supreme Court of Justice admitted the appeal for review filed by the Attorney General’s Office regarding the proceeding conducted against the Police Commander in Ituango. Likewise, as to the progress in the investigations of the Human Rights Unit regarding the case of El Aro, it informed that charges were brought against two members of the law enforcement personnel on January 31, 2007 and that on February 5, 2008, two paramilitary officers were included in the investigation. As to the murder of the confessed paramilitary officer, Francisco Enrique Villalba Hernández, the State indicated that it was conducting an investigation into the matter and that at the moment of his death, he was under home detention since it was not possible to provide the medical treatment he needed in the penitentiary center. Moreover, it pointed out that even though there was a protection program for witnesses, victims and interveners in criminal proceedings before the Attorney General’s Office, none of the people included in the investigations into the facts of La Granja and El Aro had requested protection. 9. That as to this measure, the representatives pointed out that "the State is not acting with due diligence to satisfy the justice expectations of the victims' next-of-kin". They noted that “[only] one of the 18 people marked [as perpetrators and accomplices of the massacres of El Aro and La Granja] […] had been formally joined to the proceedings due to the preliminary interview rendered by one of the highest-paramilitary chiefs" within the process of the Justice and Peace Act. According to the representatives, this "demonstrates, one more time, the inefficacy of the criminal proceedings in these cases and therefore, the impunity surrounding the facts”. In addition, they indicated that Act 975 establishes obstacles for the participation of the victims' next-of-kin in the Justice and Peace process, which constitutes an obstacle de jure for the compliance with the Judgment of the Court. The representatives also noted that in May 2008, the State extradited 14 paramilitary chiefs to the United States of America, including Salvatore Mancuso, “which created an obstacle for the victims to have access to the proceedings conducted by the State, [depriving them] of the possibility to require the complete confession” of the facts. Finally, the representatives pointed out that on April 22, 2009 “the confessed paramilitary officer, Francisco Enrique Villalba Hernández ,was murdered” and that he would have rendered statements about the fact that high-ranking state officers allegedly knew about the planning of the massacre of El Aro and the murder of the human rights defender, Jesús María Valle Jaramillo. The representatives considered that "the murder of Francisco Villalba constitutes an additional obstacle to the criminal investigations that are being conducted for the murder of Jesús María Valle [Jaramillo] and the massacre of El Aro". Therefore, they requested the Tribunal to order the State to provide information on the measures adopted to “protect the victims, the next-of-kin, the witnesses and each one of the parties to the proceeding that participate in the [criminal investigations of the instant case]”. 10. That the Commission considered that "the State has [not] submit[ed] sufficient information to determine the progress made in complying with this measure of reparation" and that “the brief information provided for by the State is outdated; that it does not indicate the procedural situation of the accused, [the] stage of the proceedings, the actions taken within the framework of these investigations or [the] probable date of the trial, for example". * * * 11. That before entering into the analysis of the foregoing, the Court needs to decide on the State’s request as to the publication of the information presented in relation to the investigations. In its report of November 14, 2008, the State requested the Tribunal “not to include the information subjected to confidentiality of legal proceedings in any public