97 334. Protection of these rights is reinforced by the general obligation to respect and ensure, as provided for in Article 1.1 of the American Convention. On this topic, the Inter-American Court has held that: Article 25 in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention obliges the State to guarantee to every individual access to the administration of justice and, in particular, to simple and prompt recourse, so that, inter alia, those responsible for human rights violations may be prosecuted and reparations obtained for the damages suffered… Article 25 “is one of the fundamental pillars not only of the American Convention, but of the very rule of law in a democratic society…”. That article is closely linked to Article 8(1), which provides that every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial 476 tribunal, for the determination of his rights, whatever their nature. 335. The principles described, on the duty of the State to act with due diligence, are relevant to the judicial processing of cases of violence perpetrated against women human rights defenders. The investigation into these acts should be conducted by the State in a prompt fashion, from the first steps, employing all reasonable measures to identify the persons responsible for the facts.477 The investigation must also take into account the context and circumstances in which they occur, and the specific risks faced by women who work in the defense of human rights in the areas affected by the Colombian armed conflict. In the instant case, it has been established in previous sections that the Colombian State had been duly alerted by the international community as to the specific risks that pose threats to the work, integrity, and lives of women human rights defenders in zones controlled by factions of the nationwide armed conflict, which reinforces the State’s duty to conduct a prompt and exhaustive investigation into these facts.478 336. Accordingly, a comprehensive strategy by the Colombian State to effectively respond to the violence against women and guarantee the non-repetition of these events, with the due diligence necessary, should include not only measures of protection and prevention, but also the use of the 476 IA Court of HR, Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Reparations. Judgment November 27, 1998. Series C No. 42, par. 169; IA Court of HR, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Preliminary Objections. Judgment June 26, 1987. Series C No. 1. par. 91; IA Court of HR, Case of Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales v. Honduras. Preliminary Objections. Judgment June 26, 1987. Series C No. 2, par. 90; IA Court of HR, Case of Godínez Cruz v. Honduras. Preliminary Objections. Judgment June 26, 1987. Series C No. 3. par. 93. 477 I/A Court H.R., Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 16, 2009. Series C No. 205, para. 293; IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser. L/V/II. doc.68, January 20, 2007, para. 32. 478 See, for example, United Nations, Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, Ms. Rhadika Coomaraswamy, Visit to Colombia, March 11, 2002, paras. 90-91; United Nations, Report by the Representative of the United Nations Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders, Hina Jilani, Visit to Colombia, April 24, 2002,paras. 138-147; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Observations on the Report of the State of Colombia, February 3, 1999, para. 271; United Nations, Reports of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Colombia, Annual Report 2002, February 24, 2003, paras. 102-108; Annual Report 2003, February 17, 2004, paras. 85-89; and Annual Report 2004, February 28, 2005, pp. 4 and 120; Mesa de Trabajo Mujeres y Conflicto Armado, Informe sobre Violencia Socio-Política Contra Mujeres, Jóvenes, y Niñas en Colombia, Third Report 2002, February 2003, p. 14; Mesa de Trabajo Mujer y Conflicto Armado, Informe sobre Violencia Socio-Política contra las Mujeres, Jóvenes y Niñas en Colombia, Mujer y Conflicto Armado, October 2004, pp. 91-102; Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgment T-496 of 2008 (Case T-1783291); and Constitutional Court of Colombia, Order 092-08. See also, IACHR, Violence and Discrimination Against Women in the Armed Conflict in Colombia, OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 67, October 18, 2006, para. 226; IACHR, Annual Report 2009, Follow-up Report on Violence and Discrimination Against Women in the Armed Conflict in Colombia, OEA/Ser.L./V/II. Doc. 67, October 18, 2006, paras. 105-106.