d) Ensure that the competent authorities conduct the corresponding investigations ex officio and, to that end, that they have available and use all the necessary logistic and scientific resources to obtain and process the evidence and, in particular, that they have the authority to access the pertinent documentation and information to investigate the events denounced and to carry out the essential actions and inquiries to clarify what happened in this case; e) Guarantee that the investigations into the events that constitute the massacres in this case remain, at all times, in the ordinary jurisdiction; f) Ensure that the different organs of the justice system involved in the case have the necessary human, financial, logistic, scientific or any other type of resources necessary to perform their tasks adequately, independently and impartially, and take the necessary measures to ensure that judicial officials, prosecutors, investigators and other agents of justice have an adequate safety and protection system, taking into account the circumstances of the cases under their responsibility and the place where they are working, that will allow them to perform their functions with due diligence, and also to ensure the protection of witnesses, victims and next of kin, and g) Ensure full access and legal standing at all the stages of the investigation and prosecution of those responsible to the victims or their next of kin. 320. In addition, the results of the corresponding proceedings must be published so that Salvadoran society knows the facts that are the purpose of this case, and also those responsible. 321. As decided in the Case of Contreras et al v. El Salvador,499 the State must adopt pertinent and adequate measures to guarantee to agents of justice, and also Salvadoran society, public, technical and systematized access to the archives that contain relevant and useful information for the ongoing investigations in the cases concerning human rights violations during the armed conflict; measures that it must support with the appropriate budgetary allocations. 2) Administrative, disciplinary or criminal measures for the State officials responsible for obstructing the investigations 322. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to require the corresponding administrative, disciplinary or criminal measures for the acts or omissions of State officials who contributed to the denial of justice and the impunity of the facts of the case, or who took part in actions to obstruct the proceedings intended to identify and punish those responsible. 323. The representatives indicated that, even though, during the judicial proceedings, numerous statements were received and that, based on the exhumations, the violent death of the victims has been proved, the State agents in charge of the proceedings have not taken a single measure to establish the truths about what happened. In addition, after five years, the trial judge has still not decided a series of requests filed by the victims’ representatives that include the non-applicability of the Amnesty Law, and the implementation of a series of procedures to clarify the facts. Furthermore, although the Supreme Court of Justice indicated that the Amnesty Law should not be applied to this kind of event more than 10 years ago, the prosecution has not filed the corresponding request, and the trial judge has not adopted any decision whatsoever. Therefore, it would be “evident that, in this case, neither the trial judge nor the Public Prosecution Service has complied with their obligations.” Consequently, they asked the Court to order the State to conduct a prompt, adequate and impartial investigation that allows the irregularities to be rectified, and those responsible to be prosecuted and punished. 324. The State made no specific reference to this claim for reparation, although it acknowledged its “obligation to investigate the events denounced, to prosecute by a fair trial 499 Cf. Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, para. 212. 105