122 j) there has been a growing and progressive system of State responsibility that in some cases has even led to acceptance of the responsibility of the State independently of any guilt, that is, an objective responsibility. In any case, the system for compensation of damage has evolved in favor of the injured parties, strengthened by joining of responsibility of the official and the administration, so that the injured parties can act against either of them: the legal or natural person; k) administrative-law jurisdiction is the appropriate domestic legal instrument to obtain compensation and reparation for human rights violations. However, it has not been possible to resort to administrative law settlement, given the weakness of evidence in the files, because being a requested jurisdiction, the burden of evidence is on the plaintiffs in the proceedings. Some of the next of kin initiated several judicial proceedings seeking to obtain compensation for the property- and non-property-related damage they suffered. It is curious that several of the individuals who participated in the international proceeding, seeking –among other thingscompensation, at the time decided not to resort to the generous legal means offered by the domestic legal system for this same purpose. However, by means of settlements, the State has recognized the compensations claimed by the plaintiffs. In the proceeding initiated by Nory Giraldo de Jaramillo, the settlement was unsuccessful due to lack of willingness of the plaintiff to settle, despite a serious proposal by the State; l) the facts have been elucidated in the domestic proceedings and justice has acted without exceeding reasonable term and without unjustified delay; m) the February 15, 2005 judgment by the High Court of the Judicial District of Bogotá is final and it exhausts the venue with regard to the persons found liable, without detriment to continuation of the investigations underway and of the international obligation of the State to investigate, prosecute, capture, and punish; n) reasonable term cannot be understood to refer only to the time and duration of a proceeding; rather, it is necessary to take into account the complexity of the matter, the procedural activity of the interested parties, and conduct of the proceeding by the authorities. The State believes that the five-year term set as a limit of reasonable term in Article 8(1) of the Convention cannot be considered an insurmountable one, because in each case the circumstances and incidents of procedure will show whether the term of the investigations conducted is reasonable; o) this is a complex case, not only factually, but also juridically. Justice has operated effectively and within a reasonable term, bearing in mind the complexity of the case. In Colombia reasonable term must be examined not only in light of the time invested in an investigation, but also in the context of the functioning of its system for administration of justice, with many difficulties and limitations in terms of financial and technical resources to attain the results sought, in addition to the critical public order situation in the areas where the investigations must be carried out and the evidence obtained;