65 capture JP, but there are no records of actions to investigate his whereabouts and take such a measure, beyond three “orders of summons”, which are equivalent to mere subpoenas. As a consequence, in September of the same year he was declared absent (supra para. 132). 247. In 2010 a statement before the Prosecutor's Office 44 indicated that MR was the main collaborator with RP. However, the former was only linked to the investigation into Omeara Miraval in 2015, and when testifying he pointed out that Omeara Miraval's body appeared because he had handed it over to the DAS. Only in July 2016 was there an order to carry out all the actions leading to verification of the participation of DAS officials in the events (supra para. 144). Therefore, the Court advises that this could have been done earlier, which could have had a beneficial effect on the effectiveness of the proceedings. 248. In addition, in the investigation of Omeara Miraval in February 2003, the authorities deemed it necessary to carry out investigative actions regarding what happened to Mr. Álvarez Sánchez (supra paras. 137 and 138). However, information on the event had been in the possession of the State since July 1995 (supra para. 127). 249. Furthermore, the file contains evidence that proves the inadequacy due to the lack of investigation of the participation of state officers in the events. Specifically, in 2015 MR stated that members of the DAS gave RP a list with the name of Mr. Omeara Miraval to kill him, and that RP ordered MR to bury him and a few days later the same DAS officials requested that he be dug up and the body handed over to them.274 Notwithstanding the foregoing, when Prosecutor 34 interviewed JP in January 2017, he did not request information on the indicated participation of members of the DAS in the events.275 There are also no other actions to follow up on the information indicated by MR. 250. Finally, with respect to the time elapsed, it is not necessary to carry out an exhaustive analysis.276 Indeed, the Court considers that a prolonged delay, such as the one that has occurred in this case, in which nearly 24 years have passed since the report of the forced disappearance of Omeara Miraval, constitutes, in principle, in and of itself, a violation of guarantee of a fair trial.277 In addition, the Court has verified shortcomings in the observance of due diligence, regarding the follow-up of lines of investigation and other aspects. For this reason, without prejudice to understanding that there are elements of complexity,278 it is evident that the time elapsed exceeds what could be considered reasonable. 251. It remains to establish that, while what happened to Mr. Omeara Miraval was a forced disappearance, the lack of diligence in the investigation occurred after the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance for Colombia entered into force on April 12, 2005, produced the breach of Article I(b) of that treaty.279 This also harmed Mr. Omeara Miraval’s next of kin who were alive at that time. MR Investigation Procedure of May 7, 2015, supra. Statement of Iván Augusto Gómez Celis, supra. 276 This would imply, in order to determine if there was reasonableness in the time elapsed in the proceedings, carefully examining different elements of the case: (a) complexity of the matter; (b) procedural activity of the interested party; (c) conduct of the judicial authorities, and (d) the impact on the legal situation of the person involved in the process (Cf. Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 192, paragraph 155, and Case of Terrones Silva et al. v. Peru, supra, paragraph 193. 277 Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago, para. 145, and Case of Terrones Silva et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 193. 278 The Court understands that the inquiry into the participation of paramilitary groups in the events, in connection with state agents, indicates the complexity of the investigation, since this implies a degree of organization in the commission of illegal acts. It also indicates the complexity, the possible connection of an illegal act with others, and the need to consider the elements and circumstances of all of them. 279 As the Court has indicated, the forced disappearance of a person ceases to be committed when his whereabouts are discovered or his remains are identified with certainty (Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. 274 275