90. Meanwhile, this Court is aware of criminal proceeding No. 6441/09, initiated by the Public Prosecutor's Office and tried at the Eighth Magistrate's Court on Precautionary Criminal Matters, which was opened for the facts related to the forced disappearance of Renato Ticona Estrada 138 and which included the investigation of the forced disappearance of Juan Carlos Flores Bedregal. The Commission and the representatives mentioned this procedure, but did not present specific allegations regarding the alleged violations of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention. Based on this, the Court shall not make any pronouncement on the aforementioned procedure. A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties A.1. Due diligence and reasonable time 91. The Commission pointed out that the State failed to initiate an ex officio investigation 139 and that 19 years elapsed from the seizure of the COB facilities until the initiation of the ordinary criminal proceedings under analysis, and that this process did not clarify what happened to Juan Carlos Flores Bedregal. It also indicated that serious obstacles were verified in the process, including irregularities, false testimonies about the alleged removal of the body, cover-up, and a "pact of silence" by the Armed Forces and the police, which constitute the violation of the State's duty of due diligence. Regarding the reasonableness of the period of time, he argued that, although the context in which the events occurred made investigations difficult, the national authorities themselves have recognized the delay, especially in the ordinary criminal proceedings initiated in 1999 and completed in 2010. At the time the case was submitted to the Court, more than 38 years had elapsed since the disappearance, with no knowledge of the victim's whereabouts. In addition, the Commission noted that only one of the three persons sentenced "to long-term sentences" in the ordinary criminal proceedings (30 years in prison for the crime of murder in the degree of complicity) served an effective sentence of imprisonment, and the other accused served shorter-term sentences. It concluded that the State violated the rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection, established in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, as well as Articles I(b) and III of the ICPPT, to the detriment of Mr. Flores Bedregal and his family members. 92. The representative, as well as the Commission, alleged a series of violations of duties by the State related to judicial guarantees and judicial protection of the alleged victims in ordinary criminal proceedings, including: i) the obligation to initiate an ex officio investigation of the forced disappearance of Mr. Flores Bedregal; ii) the obligation to carry out a serious, diligent, and exhaustive investigation, since the ordinary criminal proceedings suffered a series of irregularities; iii) proportionality in the imposed sentences and the obligation to execute the condemnatory judgment because Franz Pizarro Solano was declared a rebel and there is no information on state efforts to bring him to justice to serve his sentence, José Luis Ormachea is registered as deceased "without having real evidence that this is true,," and Felipe Froilán Molina was captured 6 years after the sentence was finalized, constituting a mechanism of impunity, and iv) the obligation to guarantee a reasonable period of time in the investigations, since the conduct of the judicial body and lack of due diligence, procedural inactivity, and lack of momentum caused excessive delays in the criminal proceeding. 138 Cf. Informational document on the initiation of an investigation by the Public Prosecutor's Office, addressed to the investigating judge on duty in criminal matters, dated July 27, 2009 (case file of evidence, p. 7570). 139 The Commission argued this both for the cumulative Suits for Damages pursued by the Public Ministry and its interveners against former de facto President Luis García Meza Tejada and his collaborators and for the ordinary criminal proceedings. 30