the violations" and that the conviction of "only" three material perpetrators, more than a decade after the facts, is "clearly insufficient in light of the criminal plot involved in the facts of the case and Jineth Bedoya's reporting on the Modelo National Prison.” They added that this amounted to a violation of Article 24 of the American Convention, since the process was afflicted by gender stereotypes and Ms. Bedoya suffered discriminatory treatment at the hands of State agents, affecting the investigation of the case. They argued this alleged lack of justice amounted to violation of Article 5 of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1 of the same international instrument, because of the suffering caused to Ms. Bedoya by the treatment she received when she arrived at the police support center, her public exposure to media cameras as she was transferred from Villavicencio to Bogotá, "the multiple occasions on which she was called to testify, several of them under unsuitable conditions," the loss of evidence, and the fact that to this day, some of the perpetrators remain in impunity. 121. The State argued that it had complied with the international obligation to investigate, prosecute, and punish those responsible for the facts of May 25, 2000 with due diligence and within a reasonable amount of time. It added that the authorities in charge of the investigation carried out a diligent investigation that included "adequate gathering of evidence" with a view to clarifying the facts and identifying those responsible, ordering all the evidentiary procedures necessary to clarify the facts, as well as complying with international standards on the investigation of crimes of sexual violence. It specified that the medical authorities carried out all the examinations necessary based on the injuries suffered by the journalist. It also indicated that the line of investigation related to Ms. Bedoya’s journalism activities was pursued. Regarding the line of investigation related to the possible participation of State agents, it argued that the judicial authorities investigated the possible participation of State agents "seriously and diligently" and that the hypothesis "could not be consolidated" since no evidentiary support was found. Regarding the violation of the right to equality, the State alleged that the Commission did not provide “even preliminary information on the existence of a discriminatory legal provision, nor did it provide evidence of discriminatory treatment in the application of any law, resolution, or action of any authority," and indicated that "there are not nor has it been proven that the State acted pursuant to the bias of gender stereotypes in the investigation." The State indicated that, as a result of the investigation of the facts, thus far three of the material perpetrators of the facts have been convicted. It added that it had already punished the torture domestically, so there are no additional elements for attributing international responsibility for the alleged non-observance of articles 1, 6, and 8 of the ICPPT. Lastly, it rejected the allegations that the procedure had not complied with the reasonable period of time, indicating that the case was “particularly complex,” because of, among other reasons, the particular difficulty of collecting evidence in a case of sexual violence, as well as the fact that the events took place in the context of a domestic armed conflict. a.2 Regarding the threats received before and after the facts of May 25, 2000 122. The Commission indicated that Ms. Bedoya was the victim of constant threats prior to her abduction on May 25, 2000, and that they were known to State authorities. It said it had no information on the opening of criminal investigations intended to identify the source of the threats or that they had been linked. It added that the State was not able to neutralize the journalist's risk through diligent investigations, nor determine the possible perpetrators and motives behind the threats, which could have contributed to determining possible perpetrators of the acts of violence that took place outside the La Modelo Prison and that "only recently did the State reopen five of these investigations and combine them, so far without determining the origin of the threats or those responsible for them, thereby perpetrating impunity and the continuation off the threats." 123. The representatives added that, "more than 20 years after the initial threats were received, none of the perpetrators have been identified, let alone sanctioned" and that the State "has not adopted real and effective measures to end the situation of risk” facing Ms. Bedoya. It also added 46