50 exercise public office or rights for 10 years; they were also condemned to pay 1,000 grams of gold for non-pecuniary damage and 3,000 grams of gold for pecuniary damage to the heirs of the 19 victims.60 88(g) On July 25, September 30, and December 3, 1997, the Regional Prosecutor of the National Human Rights Unit decided to investigate, Diego Viáfara Salinas, Luz Marina Ruiz Gómez and Lanfor Miguel Osuna Gómez in connection with the facts.61 88(h) On April 14, 1998, the National Court delivered a judgment, deciding on the appeals filed against the judgment delivered by the Cúcuta Regional Judge Regional on May 28, 1997 (supra para. 88(f)). The National Court revoked the sentences imposed on Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón, Marceliano Panesso Ocampo and Carlos Alberto Yepes Londoño on the following grounds: for the crime of the homicide of Juan Montero and José Ferney Fernández and for the crime of the extortive kidnapping of the 19 tradesmen, because “both the counsel for the prosecution and the judge of the court ignored an elementary aspect to meet the requirements of extortive kidnapping, in accordance with the norm that punished it at that time […], which is that, in addition to deprivation of the right to freedom of movement, there must, of necessity, be a demand for something in exchange for the liberty of the passive subject.” Consequently, he absolved them of those charges and from payment of the compensation for non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage to the heirs of Juan Montero and Ferney Fernández. The National Court also modified the sentence delivered against Carlos Alberto Yepes Londoño and convicted him as an accomplice to the crime of aggravated homicide to the basic punishment of 20 years’ imprisonment. Lastly, the Court confirmed the sentence imposed on Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón and Marceliano Panesso Ocampo as co-authors of the crime of the aggravated homicide of the other 17 alleged victims.62 88(i) In November and December 1998, the counsels for the defense of Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón and Carlos Alberto Yepes Londoño filed an appeal for annulment against the judgment delivered by the National Court on April 14, 1998 (supra para. 88(h)). On March 12, 2001, the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice declared that the criminal action for the death of the accused, Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón on September 26, 2000, had extinguished and, consequently, ordered the filing of the proceeding concerning the said accused.63 60 Cf. judgment delivered by the Cúcuta Regional Court on May 28, 1997 (evidence file presented by the State on April 18, 2002, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application - tome I, attachment 4, folios 1258 to 1261). 61 Cf. copy of the file before the Prosecutor of the National Human Rights Unit in the case against Jairo Iván Galvis Brochero, Robinson Gutiérrez de la Cruz, Waldo Patiño García and others for the crimes of “extortive kidnapping, aggravated homicide, [….] and others” against “Alvaro Lobo Pacheco and 18 other tradesmen”, file 087-DH (helpful evidence presented by the State on May 26, 2004, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application). 62 Cf. judgment delivered by the National Court on April 14, 1998 (evidence file presented by the State on April 18, 2002, requested on the instructions of the President of the Court - paragraph 68 of the application - tome II, attachment 5, folios 1290 to 1291); and certification issued on May 22, 2004, by the Second Judge for Criminal Affairs of the Bucaramanga Specialized Circuit (helpful evidence on merits presented by the State on May 26, 2004, requested by the Court in the Order of April 22, 2004, tome II, folios 3587 and 3588). 63 Cf. copy of the file before the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón and Carlos Alberto Yepes Londoño in the case against Carlos Alberto Yepes Londoño, Nelson Lesmes Leguizamón, Wilson de Jesús Pérez Durán and Marcelino Panesso Ocampo for “[…]the concurrent crimes of extortive kidnapping, aggravated homicide” (helpful evidence presented by the State