5 Ramírez Villalba and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba (operative paragraph five of the Judgment), the State informed that the legal representative of the victims' next-ofkin furnished the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic with information related to the different courts where the different court cases were assigned to, in order to carry out the necessary procedures to activate the corresponding case files. Thus, the State points out, in a general way that said courts would be carrying out the necessary procedures. 11. That the victims’ next- of-kin, through their representatives, referred that, up to the moment, no progress was made in the investigations kept by the Office of the Public Prosecutor or the Attorney’s General of the Republic of Paraguay. Furthermore, they mentioned that even though it is true that the representatives furnished the different courts with information, such information was of public nature and that it was already in the hands of the State. The representatives informed that the Trial Court on Criminal Matters delivered a final judgment against one of the alleged masterminds of the facts, convicting him to a 10- year imprisonment for the death of Mr. Agustín Goiburú, though the case is still not concluded. Furthermore, the representatives stated that they were familiar with the request for extradition of the former Interior Minister, who would be, at this moment, isolated in Honduras. 12. That the Commission considered that the information provided by the State does not prove that new measures have been adopted in order to comply with this obligation, and that the State would has only adopted useless measures. Furthermore, it pointed out that the State is fully aware of the existing criminal procedures regarding the victims of the instant case and that it is its duty to expedite such procedures until they are concluded, taking into account the clarifications made by the Court in its Judgment. 13. That as to the information submitted by the State, in relation to the obligation to immediately carry out the necessary procedures to activate and conclude effectively, within a reasonable time, the investigation to determine the masterminds and perpetrators of the acts committed, the Court observes that even though some measures have been adopted in order to clarify the facts of the case, there is no sufficient information to determine whether the existing judicial mechanisms have been effective. In this sense, the Tribunal considers it is vital for the State to submit up-dated, detailed and complete information on the measures carried out and the progress made in the procedures, specially, regarding any measure adopted in order to identify the possible masterminds and perpetrators. 14. That, as has been established in the Judgment, it is necessary to remember that the instant case deals with forced disappearances of people, among other violations, and that the State has the duty to initiate a prompt, serious, impartial and effective investigation ex officio (paragraph 88 of the Judgment). Certainly, during the investigation and judicial proceedings, the victims or their next of kin must have ample opportunity to take part and be heard, both in the elucidation of the facts and the punishment of those responsible, and in the quest for fair compensation. However, the investigation and the proceedings must have a purpose and be assumed by the State as its inherent legal obligation and not as the result of efforts made by private interests, which depend on the procedural initiative of the victims or their next of kin or on the contribution of probative elements by the latter (paragraph 117 of the Judgment).