103 Nonetheless, as recently as January 13, 2012, an order was issued as part of the investigation in order to obtain information on the identity and whereabouts of several of the members of the Cacique Nutibara and Héroes de Granada Blocs.512 It follows from the facts that 9 years have elapsed since the forced displacement and gradual destruction of the house of Ms. Luz Dary Ospina and her family members, and not all of the actual perpetrators, and intellectual authors have been identified and sanctioned for these events. 352. The IACHR further notes the delay caused by the suspension of this investigation for a period of two years, an order even considered unreasonable by the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit of the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney in establishing that “the delay in fulfilling the duty to investigate or the meager results obtained in the investigation are not a valid excuse to give up the mission entrusted [to it] or to disregard the interests and purpose that are pursued with the investigation – to find out the truth, investigate the facts, hold the perpetrators responsible and provide reparation to the victims – because the State must also seek justice on behalf of everyone who has a legitimate interest in the outcome of the proceeding.”513 The IACHR finds it reasonable to conclude that the delay in this type of investigation is prejudicial to the timeliness in getting to the root of the violations that are the subject of the complaint. 353. The Commission reiterates that impunity contributes to obstructing the work of women human rights defenders, and has a chilling effect on society, discouraging the reporting of serious violations.514 The most effective way to protect human rights defenders in the hemisphere is to effectively investigate the acts of violence against them and to punish all the persons responsible for such acts, both the planners and the direct perpetrators.515 Zealously pursuing every investigation of acts of violence perpetrated against women human rights defenders – in particular in contexts of risk known by the State – is in turn a fundamental component of the State’s duty to act with the due diligence required to prevent and punish violence against women. The states are obligated to fight impunity by all means at their disposal, as it fosters the chronic repetition of human rights violations, and the total defenselessness of the victims and their next of kin.516 354. As for Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas, the IACHR finds that the State has not adopted all necessary means to fulfill with due diligence its obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish everyone responsible for these crimes, in violation of Articles 8.1 and 25 of the same instrument, in connection with Article 1.1 of the Convention, and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. Likewise it finds that the State violated Articles 8.1 and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1.1, to the detriment of the next of kin of Ms. Ospina, identified as Oscar Julio Hoyos Oquendo (husband), Edid 512 Annex 60. Office of the Attorney General of the Nation, File No. 4017, Decision No. 177, January 13, 2012. Criminal proceeding for the forcible displacement of Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas. 513 Annex 55. National Directorate of Prosecutorial Offices, National Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Unit, Office 13, Decision 06, File No. 4017, January 22, 2008. Criminal proceeding for the forcible displacement of Luz Dary Ospina Bastidas. 514 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124 Doc. 5 rev. 1, March 7, 2006, para. 108. 515 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124 Doc. 5 rev. 1, March 7, 2006, para. 202. 516 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 299; I/A Court H.R., Case of Baldeón García v. Peru. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, para. 168.