218. It should be recalled that the Court has emphasized that the prompt and immediate actions of the judicial and legal authorities is essential, ordering opportune and necessary measures to determine the victim’s whereabouts or the place where he or she may be deprived of liberty. 257 The rights involved in the investigation render it obligatory to make every effort in the measures that must be taken to comply with its objective, because the passage of time bears a directly proportionate relationship to the constraints to – and, in some cases, the impossibility of – obtaining evidence and/or testimony, complicating and even making ineffective or useless, the implementation of probative measures to clarify the facts investigated, identify the possible authors and participants, and determine the eventual criminal responsibilities. 258 219. Even though, owing to its competence ratione temporis, the Court cannot derive juridical consequences from the actions of the said boards, it is essential to mention that the omissions in which these boards could have incurred conditioned or limited the subsequent judicial investigation of the Public Prosecution Service. This could be particularly serious, when it is considered that the Police Board was in charge of the investigation during the four months following Mr. González Medina’s disappearance and that the investigation in the criminal jurisdiction was only initiated one year after the disappearance had commenced. E) Lack of due diligence in the investigations conducted by the Investigating Court, the Review Chamber, and the Public Prosecution Service 220. The Court will examine the effectiveness of these investigations based, above all, on verifying compliance with the obligation to investigate with due diligence. According to this obligation, the organ that investigates a human rights violation must use all available means to carry out, with a reasonable time, all those actions and inquiries required in order to try and obtain the result sought. 259 This obligation to investigate with due diligence acquires special intensity and significance in view of the seriousness of the crimes committed and the nature of the rights violated. 260 221. This Court finds it appropriate to reiterate that, since this is a case of forced disappearance, it is necessary to apply an integral perspective in the investigation of this act, owing to the multiple conducts that, combined towards a single objective, violate permanently while they subsist, rights protected by the Convention (supra para. 129). In other words, the domestic organs must act with due diligence in an integral investigation of the elements that constitute the forced disappearance (supra para. 128). 222. In this regard, the Court reiterates that the multiple violations and the permanent or continuing nature of forced disappearance of persons have been consistent criteria of the Court’s case law since its first cases in 1988, according to which, the act of disappearance and its execution start with the person’s deprivation of liberty and the subsequent absence of information about their fate, and subsists while the whereabouts of the disappeared person are unknown or until their remains are identified with certainty (supra para. 50). 257 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, supra note 150, para. 134, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 145. 258 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama, supra note 59, para. 150, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra note 51, para. 145. 259 Cf. Case of Gómez Palomino v. Peru, supra note 153, para. 80, and Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 163, para. 156. 260 Cf. Case of La Cantuta v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 29, 2006. Series C No. 162, para. 157, and Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, supra note 259, para. 156. 70