310. The Court observes that, owing to the particular characteristics of the case, and for the reasons already indicate in this Judgment (supra paras. 59 and 51), it has not been possible to identify and individualize all the victims. Consequently, the Court considers that, in the instant case, there is a reasonable justification to apply the exception established in Article 35(2) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure in order to include other persons as victims even when they have not been identified and individualized previously by this Court, by the Inter-American Commission or by the representatives (supra para. 57). To this end, the Court assesses positively the State’s initiative to create the “Single List of the Victims and Next of Kin of the Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations during the Massacre of El Mozote.” Accordingly, this Court establishes that the State must continue with the full implementation of the “Single List of the Victims and Next of Kin of the Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations during the Massacre of El Mozote”; to this end, it must adopt the necessary measures to ensure its sustainability and the budgetary allocation to guarantee its effective operation. In addition, the Court considers it pertinent that, within one year of notification of this Judgment, the State present the results of the identification of the victims who were executed, the surviving victims, the next of kin of the executed victims, and the victims forcibly displaced of the massacres of El Mozote and nearby places, conducted within the framework of the “Single List of the Victims and Next of Kin of the Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations during the Massacre of El Mozote,” so that these persons may request and receive the corresponding reparation in the terms of this Judgment. 311. The foregoing does not impede or exclude the possibility that, when the one-year time frame has expired, the process of identifying the victims continue, and that any new victims be added to the “Single List of the Victims and Next of Kin of the Victims of Grave Human Rights Violations during the Massacre of El Mozote,” and be considered beneficiaries of the reparations established in this Judgment to be made by the State, when they submit this request to the Salvadoran authorities, outside the established time frame. The State must provide information to the Court about the persons who have requested reparations in the context of the said mechanism. To this end, the Court will make the pertinent assessment in the exercise of its authority to monitor this Judgment. B. Obligation to investigate the facts that gave rise to the violations and to identify, prosecute and punish, as appropriate, those responsible, and also to locate, identify and, return to their next of kin the remains of the victims of the massacres 1) Complete investigation, determination, prosecution and punishment of all the masterminds and perpetrators of the massacres eventual 312. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to undertake an impartial and effective investigation, within a reasonable time, to elucidate the facts fully, identify the masterminds and perpetrators, and impose the corresponding punishments. In addition, it maintained that in their prompt compliance with this obligation, the Salvadoran authorities may not invoke the Law of General Amnesty for the Consolidation of Peace. Thus, it asked that the Court order the immediate reopening of the investigations, without this being opposed by either the decision to dismiss the proceedings or the Law of General Amnesty for the Consolidation of Peace. It also asked the Court to order the State to annul or revoke the Law of General Amnesty for the Consolidation of Peace, because it prevents the investigation, prosecution and punishment of those responsible for violations of human rights and the rights of the victims to the truth, justice and reparation; accordingly, the State must use the legal and/or constitutional means available to it to ensure that the application of this law “does not continue perpetuating General Directorate of Statistics and Censuses (DIGESTYC) of the Ministry of Economy, and the second procedure by a Government technical team (the Technical Secretariat of the Presidency, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the General Directorate of Statistics and Censuses). Both procedures would be guided by the victims’ association. In addition, the State indicated that, as part of the comprehensive reparation policy, a mechanism was being developed that would allow the permanent administration of the said list; in other words, it was “not preparing a single physical list; it is a preliminary list that will allow the incorporation of other victims that were not included in these procedures, as necessary.” 102