disciplinary proceedings opened owing to the facts of this case, the Commission pointed out that none of them has led to any real results; that some of them are still at the preliminary stages, and that others have prescribed. Lastly, it indicated that the extradition to the United States of America of individuals who had testified under the Justice and Peace Law constitutes an obstacle to resolving the impunity of the events.612 362. The representatives added that the State had failed to comply with its obligation to investigate and punish, impartially and diligently and within a reasonable time, all those responsible for the events of this case and, consequently, “has failed to comply with its obligation to ensure the victims the right to the truth and the right to justice.” They also indicated that the domestic judicial proceedings were characterized by a lack of due diligences manifested by the absence of a comprehensive investigation of the facts. They indicated that, as a result of this, after nearly 15 years had elapsed, the events of this case remain in impunity.613 363. Regarding the additional shortcomings in the investigation into the paramilitaries presumably involved in the events, the representatives charged that there had been obstructions de facto and de jure as a result of the demobilization procedure. In addition, they argued that the legal framework of the demobilization procedure, which granted legal benefits to the members of the paramilitary groups who demobilized, also affected the victims’ right to justice. 364. Lastly, the representatives indicated that the protection ruling T-955/03 handed down by the Constitutional Court ordering the suspension of logging, and some disciplinary procedures opened by the Public Prosecution Service against local environmental authorities had not guaranteed “the effective enjoyment of the right to collective property and the natural resources, in the terms in which these rights are recognized in the case law of the InterAmerican Court.” They added that the State had “not taken effective measures to repair the environmental damage that this situation has generated and to ensure that the said activities do not continue.” against them for the actions undertaken in legitimate exercise of their functions, precautionary measures were granted after which the pressure and threats suffered by these officials at the investigation stage of proceeding No. 5767 were monitored. It added that the former soldier, O.J.G.Y. requested protection for himself and his family in order to continue testifying in the criminal proceeding and in a disciplinary proceeding owing to the threats he had received, but this was not provided, causing him to retract his previous statements. All of this, in the Commission’s opinion ���constituted an obstruction to the progress of the investigation and non-compliance with the search for the truth and the punishment of those responsibsle.” 612 In this regard, the Commission recalled its considerations that “the extradition of a demobilized individual so that he can respond in another country for offenses that are less serious that the ones he is confessing before the Colombian judges is a form of impunity.” 613 In order to substantiate this, the representatives analyzed actions of the Colombian authorities: (a) the lack of due diligence and the unjustified delay in the proceeding before the ordinary justice system; (b) the irregularities and obstructions of justice in the ordinary criminal proceeding; (c) the logical lines of investigation that were not explored; (d) the additional deficiencies of the investigation into the paramilitaries involved in the events, and (d) the ineffectiveness of the disciplinary proceedings and the failure to investigate the illegal exploitation on the territory. Regarding the first point, they noted that the State had not conducted an effective investigation into the offense of forced displacement, even though this offense – which previously corresponded to illegal constraint described in article 276 of Decree 100 of 1890 – had been criminalized autonomously since 2000. Similarly, they indicated that, in the proceeding opened under file No. 2332, the crime of Marino López was investigated in isolation, without considering its nature as a crime against humanity. They indicated that the displacement, the paramilitary incursion, and the violations of international humanitarian law commited by State agents during “Operation Genesis” had been excluded from this investigation. Regarding the second point, they indicated that the conduct of the different investigations had been characterized by the absence of guarantees for the victims and witnesss to be able to appear before the authorities and testify to the facts without being harassed, accused and, subsequently, victims of spurious judicial charges. On the third point, the representatives indicated as the main factor of impunity the refusal of the judicial authorities to investigate these events systematically. They indicated that the crimes of which the Cacarcia communities were the victims responded to a complex structure of criminal collusion that included soldiers, politicians and leaders of the paramilitary groups and their henchmen. Lastly, the representatives indicated that the paramilitary participation in the murder had not been investigated adequately, or the connections between the soldiers and the paramilitaries involved. 118