and (iv) the impact on the legal situation of the alleged victim.240 The Court recalls that it is up to the State to justify, based on the criteria indicated, the reason why it has required the time elapsed to deal with the cases and, in the event that it cannot be justified, the Court has broad powers to make its own estimate in this regard.241 The Court also reiterates that the total duration of the process must be considered, from the first procedural act until the final sentence is handed down, including any possible appeals that may be presented.242 127. Additionally, the Court highlights that the criminal process involved a girl victim of sexual violence, which requires that, in this case, the judicial guarantee of a reasonable time established in Article 8(1) of the American Convention must be analyzed together with the duty of the State to act “without delay” and with due diligence to investigate and punish violence against women, provided in article 7(b) of the Convention of Belém do Pará,243 as well as taking into account the duty of special protection derived from Article 19 of the American Convention. Similarly, Article 9 of the Convention of Belém do Pará 244 provides the content of these duties, in relation to the particular situation of vulnerability and the needs of the alleged victim when the victim is a girl.245 128. Regarding the complexity of the matter, the Court notes that, in this case, there was only one victim and one alleged perpetrator, identified by the victim from the beginning. In addition, at the beginning of the criminal proceedings and during the first stage, there was already a statement given by the victim,246 the investigative statement of the accused,247 a gynecological forensic examination,248 without prejudice to the serious irregularities indicated above, documentary evidence referring to two psychological assessments of Brisa249 and a medical assessment,250 as well as witness statements.251 Therefore, this Court confirms that there are no relevant elements of complexity. 129. In relation to the procedural activity of the interested party, the Court notes that there was a procedural impetus promoted by Brisa’s father and legal representatives. In fact, on August 1, 2002, José Miguel De Angulo filed a complaint against E.G.A. before the TJP for the crime of rape against his daughter, and on November 15, 2002, after the formal accusation presented by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, Brisa and her parents filed private charges. Furthermore, it should be emphasized The Court has stated that to determine the reasonableness of the term, the impact generated by the duration of the procedure on the legal situation of the person involved must be taken into account, considering, among other elements, the subject matter of the dispute. Cf. Case of National Association of Discharged and Retired Employees of the National Tax Administration Superintendence (ANCEJUB-SUNAT) v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 21, 2019. Series C No. 394, para. 148, and Case of Sales Pimenta v. Brazil, supra, para. 107 and footnote 183. 240 241 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 22, 2009. Series C No. 202, para. 156, and Case of Sales Pimenta v. Brazil, supra, para. 107. 242 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 71, and Case of Sales Pimenta v. Brazil, supra, para. 107. 243 Cf. Case of V.R.P., V.P.C. et al. v. Nicaragua, supra, para. 278. Article 9 of the Belém do Pará Convention provides that “[…] the States Parties will take special account of the vulnerability of women to violence by reason of, among others, [… of] minor age [ …]”. 244 The Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated that “[i]n all actions involving children who have been victims of violence, the principle of speed must be applied, respecting the rule of law.” Cf. Committee on the Rights of the Child. General Comment No. 13: Right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence, CRC/C/GC/13, April 18, 2011, para. 54.d. 245 246 Cf. Information statement of Brisa De Angulo Losada, supra (evidence file, folios 7266 to 7267). Cf. Record of interview conducted by the Departmental Directorate of the PTJ of Quillacollo on August 7, 2002 (evidence file, folios 7277 to 7278). 247 248 Cf. Forensic medical certificate signed by M.R.C, supra (evidence file, folio 9500). Cf. Certificate produced by Terri S. Gilsson, supra (evidence file, folio 7860) and Psychological certification produced by the DNI psychologist, supra (evidence file, folios 7260 to 7261). 249 250 Cf. Certificate produced by Lourdes de Armas, supra (evidence file, folio 7853). Cf. Record of the oral trial hearing issued by the Sentencing Court No. 4 of Cochabamba, March 17 to 25, 2003 (evidence file, folios 7618 to 7619). 251 43