9 25. At the private hearing (supra Having Seen clause No. 7), the victims’ representatives maintained that “there is no question [that] N.N. Moisés was buried, as were the other six victims, by the people of the municipality of Mocoa at the cemetery, and [that] that is where he lies.” Accordingly, they argued that what should be done is plan the search for his remains based on the land where the cemetery is located, using mechanisms that are in line with the circumstances of the case. Lastly, they noted that, because N.N./ Moisés has yet to be identified, it is necessary that “the publications [ordered by the Court in an attempt to locate his next of kin] be made periodically [by the State] until [they are] found.” 26. At the private hearing (supra Having Seen clause No. 7), the Inter-American Commission addressed the information relayed by the State in connection with the actions, steps and evidence taken with a view to locating and identifying N.N./ Moisés. In particular, it noted that “the location of [N.N./ Moisés] [remains] unknown.” In this regard, it expressed its interest in “understanding how the reparations in this specific case are favored by the [Virtual Identification Center, i.e.] what specific progress has been made in the specific case of finding N.N./ Moisés and how this is positively affected or how [these measures…] lead to a reasonable expectation of getting results within a reasonable period of time.” In this regard, it considered it necessary to have more information available regarding “its mandate, its creation, the reasons for it, its functions, […] whether it is already operating, [and the fact] that it is coordinated by Justice and Peace […] what it means as far as the instant case is concerned.” Lastly, in connection with investigation 876-A, it considered it useful and necessary to “be informed of the steps taken subsequently to the Judgment of the Court, to be able to understand whether the evidence incorporated to that file is suitable.” 27. The Court notes that, at the private hearing (supra Having Seen clause No. 7), both the Commission and the victims’ representatives, as well as this Tribunal, expressed their interest in receiving further information on the “Virtual Identification Center.” In that regard, it finds it relevant for the State to provide detailed information on the subject. Moreover, it finds it necessary for the State to submit complete, detailed information regarding the set of steps and actions taken in connection with investigation 876-A, as well as other investigations and steps related to the effective, actual progress in determining the identity and locating and and the Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad [Administrative Department of Security], […] the Instituto de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses [Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences,” and that “this team is coordinated by the Head of the Justice and Peace Unit.” The State explained that, “CUVI’s specific mission is to locate pits, exhume bodies, identify them and release them to the families as a measure of reparation and a contribution to the right to learn the truth in Colombia.” 15 The State also reported that, on August 15, 2009, “the judicial police submitted a report to the Prosecutor […] on several steps taken which, unfortunately, had negative results.” It further explained that, on December 15, 2009, “the Prosecutor ordered certain evidentiary actions to be taken in the investigation,” as a result of which, “[first of all,] in the investigation there are [currently] elements that lead to investigation hypotheses that might guide the investigation to establish the full identity of N.N./ Moisés and the whereabouts of his next of kin, and, [second,] […] photographs and coordinates were taken of the site where his remains are possibly buried.”