45 the instant Judgment, at least once, in the Diario Oficial (Official Gazette) and in another national daily newspaper with national coverage, the Section of the instant Judgment called Proven Facts, without its footnotes, paras. 54 to 65 in the Section of the instant Judgment called Merits, and the operative paragraphs (infra para. 125) herein. d) Implementing measures to render the writ of habeas corpus effective for cases of forced disappearance in Venezuela 102. In the instant case the writs of habeas corpus requested in favor of Messrs. Oscar José Blanco-Romero, Roberto Javier Hernández-Paz and José Francisco RivasFernández were declared “not applicable” by the Second, Fifth and Sixth Jueces de Control del Circuito Judicial Penal del Estado Vargas (Control Judges of the Criminal Court Circuit for Vargas State), respectively, for they expressed that the victims were not deprived “neither unlawfully nor illegitimately" of their liberty by officers from the DISIP. Regarding the situation of Mr. Roberto Javier Hernández-Paz, the Juez Sexto de Control (Sixth Control Judge) expressed that no “record exist[ed] neither of the place of imprisonment nor of the authority which [was] allegedly holding him in detention.” Likewise, the writ requested in favor of Mr. Oscar José Blanco-Romero was declared “non-applicable” despite the fact that the Commander of the Army reported that on December 21, 1999, members of the Army arrested such person and delivered him to DISIP officers. 103. In turn, the Commission pointed out that “the judges deciding on the petitions for writs of habeas corpus did not request or inspect personally the registration or log books neither of the DISIP nor of the Army, in order to establish whether the victims had been effectively arrested, as well as the place, the circumstances and the agents involved.” On such matter, the Court observes that the expert witness Jesús María Casal mentioned that “the use of the writ of habeas corpus when facing the forced disappearance of persons” is an “aspect that is not clearly covered under the laws in force.” He also indicated that legislation is “outdated with respect to constitutional standards and to those of International Human Rights Law”, something which includes the existence of “gaps of a procedural nature.” 104. Because of the foregoing, the Court considers that the State must adopt, according to Articles 7(6), 25 and 2 of the American Convention, the legislative or other measures that may be necessary so that in Venezuela the writ of habeas corpus may be granted in an effective manner when facing situations of forced disappearance. For such purpose, the State must take into account the scope of the writ of habeas corpus in the light of international rules on the matter, and particularly of the case law established in this Tribunal, in the sense that such writ represents the effective means to ensure that people's life and physical integrity are respected, and to prevent their disappearance or the uncertainty about their place of detention.60 e) Adapting the description of the crime of forced disappearance to international standards on the matter 60 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 44, para. 90; Case of Tibi, supra note 43, para. 123; and Habeas corpus in Emergency Situations (Arts. 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of January 30, 1987. Series A No. 8, para. 35.