5 the episodes of forced disappearance alleged by the petitioners, under the Guatemalan Constitution no one could be brought to trial charged with a crime of forced disappearance. 27. It added that the alleged victims and their next of kin could apply for the National Reparations Program, whose “mission is to bring dignity to the civilian victims of the internal armed conflict, in a manner that respects their cultural identity, and thereby contribute to society’s reconciliation.” It stressed the fact that the alleged victims’ next of kin could apply for the PNR since the facts denounced are mainly based on the Report of the Recovery of the Historical Memory Project. It maintained that the PNR has 14 regional offices, one of which is in the municipality of Rabinal, in which the village of Chichupac and neighboring communities are located. It added that Chichupac villagers have filed 52 applications with the PNR. It also pointed out that the alleged victims’ family members who have already received a sum of money under the PNR are not eligible for any further compensation since “two payments cannot be made for the same reason.” 28. It also observed that former members of the PAC are not eligible to receive any type of compensation under the PNR since, “they served (…) as collaborators of the National Army during the armed conflict, in the sense that within the communities they enforced the control being exercised over the civilian population.” It indicated that compensation has been paid under a payments program for former members of the Civil Self-Defense Patrols. 29. The State also pledged “to make all the necessary inquiries to determine whether skeletal remains have been recovered or identified at the sites indicated by the petitioners.” 30. In its last two briefs, the State presented arguments apropos of the case’s eventual referral to the Inter-American Court, and specifically argued: i) the Court’s lack of contentious jurisdiction to take up the present case; and ii) the Court’s lack of competence in the instant case to interpret and apply the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. IV. THE MERITS A. The Guatemalan State’s acknowledgement of responsibility 31. On July 28, 2011, the State of Guatemala acknowledged its international responsibility in the following terms: The Guatemalan State hereby declares that it acknowledges its international responsibility for the violations alleged and substantiated by the petitioners in the present case, for the period between the time the violations were committed and up to the present day and with respect to the victims who have been fully identified and the violation of whose rights has been proven in cases brought before the institutions of national justice, and with respect to the identified victims documented in the Report of the Commission for Historical Clarification 32. The Commission appreciates the Guatemalan State’s acknowledgement of responsibility. After examining the Commission for Historical Clarification (CEH) report and piecing together the facts of this case, the Commission observes that the State’s acknowledgement of responsibility is with reference to at least the following: - The massacre in the village of Chichupac on January 8, 1982 (infra, paragraphs 72-82);