22 66. For an investigation to be effective, States must establish an adequate regulatory framework for the development of the investigation, which implies regulating the forced disappearance of persons as an autonomous crime in their domestic legislation, since criminal prosecution is an adequate instrument for preventing future violations of human rights67 of this nature (infra para. 193). 67. From the foregoing, it can be concluded that the acts that constitute a forced disappearance have a permanent nature and lead to multiple violations of the rights acknowledged in the American Convention while the whereabouts of the victim are unknown or their remains have not been located; therefore, States have a corollary duty to investigate such acts and punish those responsible, as appropriate, in accordance with the obligations derived from the American Convention and, in particular, from the InterAmerican Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons.68 68. Thus, the analysis of forced disappearances must include the totality of the facts presented for the Tribunal’s consideration in the present case.69 Only in this manner will the legal analysis of this phenomenon be consistent with the complex violations of human rights it entails,70 with its continued or permanent nature and the need to consider the context in which the facts occurred in order to analyze its effects prolonged in time and focus comprehensively on its consequences,71 taking into consideration both the Inter-American and international corpus juris of protection. C. On the alleged disappearance of Messrs. Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and Jose Luis Ibsen Peña 69. The facts mentioned by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives regarding the alleged detention and subsequent disappearance of the alleged victims have certain circumstantial connections. Therefore, the Tribunal deems pertinent to briefly refer, in the first place, only to some family and professional background of Messrs. Jose Luis Ibsen Peña and Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas that bears on the understanding of the case. Then, given that the alleged disappearances occurred at different times and have led to different consequences over the years, as will be described below, the Tribunal deems it convenient to address those events and analyze the alleged human rights violations separately. 70. It is worth repeating that even though the claimant bears the burden of proof of the facts on which his or her argument is based, in proceedings on violations of human rights, the State’s defense cannot rest upon the claimant’s inability to provide certain evidence when it is the State who has control of the means necessary to bring events that occurred within its territory to light. Below, the Court will carry out an examination of the evidence 67 Cf. Case of Gómez Palomino v. Peru, supra note 50, paras. 96 and 97; Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, supra note 44, para. 66, and Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 144. 68 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 145. 69 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panamá, supra note 1, para. 112; Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 146, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 87. 70 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panamá, supra note 1, para. 150; Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 146, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 87. 71 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, supra note 7, para. 85; Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 146, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 87.