- 49 - severe type of punishment.” In other words, the Attorney General’s office itself pointed out the disproportionate character of the sanction.191 B. THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE-LAW 138. The next of kin of Senator Cepeda Vargas filed two independent lawsuits under administrative law (infra paras. 245 and 249). In the first, in September 1999, the Cundinamarca Administrative Court declared the administrative responsibility of the Nation, the Ministry of Defense and the DAS by omission and ordered them to pay compensation to the next of kin. In the second, on February 8, 2001, that court declared the State’s responsibility in the same terms, because “it had not complied adequately with its inherent constitutional and legal obligation to provide protection, since it had not taken appropriate safety measures to protect the life of the deceased Senator.”192 The DAS appealed the decision and it was then examined by the Council of State, which was the next jurisdictional level – in view of the subsequent discontinuance by the DAS – and, on November 20, 2008, it issued a final ruling in which it declared the State’s responsibility by omission.193 139. As previously indicated, when assessing the effectiveness of the remedies filed under the domestic administrative jurisdiction,194 the Court must verify whether the decisions taken by the jurisdiction have made an effective contribution to end impunity, to ensure non-repetition of the harmful acts, and to guarantee the free and full exercise of the rights protected by the Convention. In particular, these decisions may be relevant in relation to the obligation to make integral reparation for any rights violated.195 Also, in several cases against Colombia, the Court found that the integral reparation of the violation of a right protected by the Convention could not be limited to the payment of compensation to the victim’s next of kin.196 Integral and adequate reparation, under the Convention, requires measures of rehabilitation, satisfaction, and guarantees of nonrepetition. The results obtained in the domestic proceedings will be taken into account when establishing reparations (infra paras. 245 to 247 and 249 to 253). 140. Regarding access to justice, it should be emphasized that, in this case, the administrative law courts did not establish the institutional responsibility, by act, of State officials in the execution of Senator Cepeda Vargas, taking into consideration the violation of his rights to life and to personal integrity, among other rights, even though, when arriving at their decisions, they were already aware of the partial results of the criminal 191 Cf. Second instance judgment in case No. 143-6444/96, delivered by the office of the Attorney General delegated to the Military Forces on August 3, 1999 (evidence file, tome X, attachment 159 to the brief with pleadings, motions and evidence, folios 4364 and 1396). 192 Judgment delivered by the Third Section of the Decision Chamber of the Administrative Court (de Descongestión) of Bogotá in case No. 12,680 on February 8, 2001, supra note 126, folio 1972. 193 Cf. Appeal judgment delivered by the Third Section of the Administrative-law Chamber of the Council of State in Investigation No. 250002326000199612680-01 (20,511) on November 20, 2008, supra note 128, folio 4495). 194 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre.” Merits, reparations and costs, supra note 22, para. 210; Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 16, para. 217; Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 16, para. 338, and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 136, para. 206. 195 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre.” Merits, reparations and costs, supra note 22, para. 214; Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 16, para. 219; Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 16, para. 339; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 136, para. 206. 196 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”. Merits, reparations and costs, supra note 22, para. 214; Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 16, para. 219; Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 16, para. 339; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 136, para. 206.