authorities are obliged to assist in gathering evidence to achieve the objectives of an investigation and refrain from carrying out acts that would obstruct the progress of the investigation. 188 139. Likewise, when a punishable fact is being investigated, the decision to define the information as secret and to refuse to submit it can never depend exclusively on a State body whose members are deemed responsible for committing the illegal act. 189 Likewise, the final decision concerning the existence of the documentation requested cannot be left to their discretion. 190 In addition, the State cannot waive its positive obligations to ensure the right to the truth and access to public files merely by alleging that the information requested by the judge in charge of investigating the facts of this case is non-existent or was destroyed. To the contrary, the State has the obligation to seek that information using all possible means, and make the necessary efforts to reconstruct such information, which may include conducting several procedures in military archives. 191 140. The Court highlights the State's obligation to guarantee the effectiveness of an appropriate procedure for the processing and resolution of the requests for information. Such a procedure should set deadlines for resolving and delivering information, and should be administered by officials that are duly qualified. Finally, given the denial of access to determined information under State control, the State must guarantee the existence of a simple, quick, and effective remedy before an independent organ, distinct from the one that denied the request, that can determine if there was harm to the right to access information, and where applicable, order the corresponding authority to present said information. 192 B.2. Analysis of the specific case 141. The Court will rule on State action relating to requests for information after July 27, 1993, the date from which this Court has jurisdiction to hear alleged violations of the Convention attributed to Bolivia (supra, para. 14). After referring to the domestic regulatory framework on the right of access to information, the Court will examine requests made in the context of: a) criminal proceedings of the "Public Prosecutor v/ Franz Pizarro Solano et al.", and b) the administrative procedure by Ministerial Resolution No. 316/09. B.2.1 Domestic regulatory framework on the right of access to information 142. Article 21.6 of the Political Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia provides that Bolivian women and men have the right to access, interpret, analyze, and communicate information freely, whether individually or collectively. Likewise, Article 106(I) and (II) determines that the State must guarantee the right of access to information. 193 188 Cf. Case of García Prieto et al. v. El Salvador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 168, para. 112, and Case of Movilla Galarcio et al. v. Colombia, supra, para. 159. 189 Cf. Case of Myrna Mack Chang v. Guatemala, supra, para. 181, and Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment dated March 15, 2018. Series C No. 353, para. 333. 190 Cf. Case of Gomes Lund et al. ("Guerrilha do Araguaia") v. Brazil, supra, para. 202, and Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil, supra, para. 334. 191 Cf. Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil, supra, para. 334, and Case of the Massacres of El Mozote and surrounding areas v. El Salvador. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights dated November 25, 2021, whereas clause 6. 192 Cf. Case of Claude Reyes et al. v. Chile, supra, paras. 137 and 163, and Case of Gomes Lund et al. ("Guerrilha do Araguaia") v. Brazil, supra, para. 231. 193 Cf. Political Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, of February 7, 2009, articles 21 and 106. Available at: https://www.oas.org/dil/esp/constitucion_bolivia.pdf 43