the alleged victim. 305 The Court recalls that the State is responsible for justifying—based on the above indicated criteria—the time taken to deal with cases, and where it fails to do so, the Court has broad authority to conduct its own assessment. 306 The Court also reiterates that the total length of the proceeding must be used, from the first procedural act until issuance of the final judgment, including any appeals that may be filed. 307 143. In this case, the Court notes that it was a criminal case with a single victim. Likewise, the Court observes that the State learned of the facts immediately after they occurred, which facilitated the collection of useful medical evidence, a number of relevant testimonies, and other highly relevant additional evidence (for example, the footage from security cameras located around the La Modelo Prison or the telephone records of the calls made by the perpetrators during the kidnapping of Ms. Bedoya). Although it is true that multiple actors participated, which could complicate investigation of the case, it is this Court’s understanding that there were no major obstacles to an effective investigation into what happened. 308 144. Regarding the procedural conduct of the victim, the Court notes that, far from having any kind of passive or obstructive attitude that could delay the procedure, Ms. Bedoya, forced by the circumstances of the deficient investigation by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, had to take the initiative by conducting her own investigation and providing the appropriate evidence to State authorities. This also called into question the conduct of the State authorities, who even asked Ms. Bedoya if she had been able to obtain more information on the perpetrators of the facts. 309 In this regard, Ms. Bedoya stated that "for 11 years, the prosecutor in charge of the case called me to ask me why I was not continuing to investigate my case and to turn over those investigations to him to solve it." 310 For his part, witness Gómez Gómez indicated that it was not until 2011 that the Office of the Public Prosecutor called to interview him so that he could give his account of the facts. 311 The same happened with Mr. Cardona, an eyewitness to what happened. 312 In addition to being confirmed manner. Cf. Case of Mejia Idrovo v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2011. Series C No. 228, para. 106, and Case of Olivares Muñoz et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 123. 305 With regard to the impact on the alleged victim’s legal situation, the Court has found that to determine the reasonableness of the term, the adverse effect of the duration of the proceedings on the judicial situation of the person involved in it must be taken into account, bearing in mind, among other elements, the matter in dispute. Cf. Case of the National Association of Discharged and Retired Employees of the National Tax Administration Superintendence v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 21, 2019. Series C No. 394, para. 148, and Case of Olivares Muñoz et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 123. Cf. Case of Anzulado Castro v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 22, 2009. Series C No. 202, para. 156, and Case of Olivares Muñoz et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 123. 306 Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 20, 1999. Series C No. 44, para. 71, and Case of Olivares Muñoz et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 123. 307 308 Cf. Case of Guzmán Albarracín et al v. Ecuador, supra, para. 182. 309 Cf. Expansion of complaint of Jineth Bedoya Lima, August 11, 2010 (evidence file, folio 638). Cf. Statement from Jineth Bedoya Lima given at the public hearing held on March 15, 22, and 23, 2021 within the framework of the 140th regular sessions. 310 311 312 Cf. Statement made before a notary public by Ignacio Gómez Gómez, of March 8, 2021 (evidence file, folio 39967). He testified as follows during the public hearing before this Court: I was summoned again in 2011, when at the request of Justice and Peace, a law created for the troubled State Peace process and paramilitarism, there was an opportunity for an individual known as alias JJ to make a public confession that I witnessed with Jineth Bedoya. He said he had received the order to assassinate Jineth Bedoya from a motorcycle in front of the La Modelo Prison, but that he received instructions at the last minute that the plan had changed, and then this happened. From there, that is, between 2000 and 2011, there was no other significant movement, or at least that I knew about. Cf. Statement by Jorge Enrique Cardona Álzate given during the public hearing held on March 15, 22, and 23 within the framework of the 140th regular sessions. 53